Evolutionary patterns of diadromy in fishes: more than a transitional state between marine and freshwater

Corush, Joel B.

doi:10.1186/s12862-019-1492-2

Cited by 26 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…FishBase, IUCN, and a recent compilation (Corush 2019) to identify the habitat of the remaining 138 4,870 species that were not recorded in freshwater drainage basins. Of these, 4,139 species were 139 strictly marine, explaining their absence in this database (Tedesco et al 2017b).…”

Section: Groups 82mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these, 4,139 species were 139 strictly marine, explaining their absence in this database (Tedesco et al 2017b). I also identified 140 244 diadromous species, which were excluded from all analyses as these species have a distinct 141 8 lifestyle from other freshwater or marine fishes (Corush 2019). Finally, I excluded 311 species 142 without enough information in these sources to confidently assign a habitat category.…”

Section: Groups 82mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing diversification rates in lakes, rivers, and the sea

Miller

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

19The diversity of species inhabiting freshwater relative to marine habitats is striking, given that 20 freshwater habitats make up less than 1% of Earth's water. The most commonly proposed 21 mechanism for this pattern is that freshwater habitats are more fragmented than marine habitats, 22 resulting in increased opportunities for allopatric speciation in freshwater and thus increased 23 speciation rates relative to marine habitats. However, some authors suggest that speciation is 24 faster in sympatry than allopatry, as illustrated by lacustrine radiations such as African cichlids. 25 Sympatric speciation may be common in lakes, while allopatric speciation may be dominant in 26 rivers. If allopatric speciation is inherently slower than sympatric speciation, we might expect 27 differences in rates of speciation between lineages primarily confined to riverine versus 28 lacustrine habitats. These differences within freshwater habitats may be important to consider 29 when comparing diversification rates between freshwater and marine lineages. Here I compared 30 rates of speciation associated with ray-finned fishes in marine, riverine and lacustrine habitats. I 31 also used geographic range data to compare rates of speciation associated with allopatric and 32 sympatric speciation modes in freshwater fishes. I found that lakes had faster rates of speciation 33 than other aquatic habitats. However, most freshwater fish diversity arose through allopatric 34 speciation in rivers, despite their slower speciation rate. Speciation rates were more strongly 35 correlated with habitat (riverine or lacustrine) than present-day range overlap (allopatry or 36 sympatry). Surprisingly, riverine and marine habitats had similar rates of speciation. Models of 37 evolution suggest that lacustrine habitats are evolutionary unstable, and biased transition rates 38 explain the dearth of lacustrine species. Collectively, these results suggest that while allopatric 39 speciation is important for generating freshwater diversity, this mechanism may not be the cause 40 of faster speciation rates between freshwater and marine habitats. 41 3 KEY WORDS 42 43 Fishes, allopatric speciation, sympatric speciation, speciation rates, lacustrine radiations, 44 diversification 45 46 47 48 49 50

show abstract

Section: Groups 82mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Groups 82mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing diversification rates in lakes, rivers, and the sea

Miller

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, population sizes in diadromous species are also expected to be larger, leading to reduced extinction rates. In a recent analysis of actinopterygian fishes (7822 species), Corush (2019) observed a positive relationship between diadromy status and diversification, using State-dependent Speciation Extinction models (Beaulieu and O'Meara 2016). In contrast, while analyzing the same taxa, Tedesco et al (2017) obtained the opposite result, using method-of-moment estimators of diversification rate for each family.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Although migration does not necessitate spatial shifts in reproduction (i.e., dispersal), a positive association is assumed (Lombal et al 2020). As with other dispersal-related traits, migration presents an interesting conundrum with respect to predicting its impact on diversification (McDowall, 1988(McDowall, , 2001Winker 2000;Corush 2019). Assuming some level of straying during migration, migration should lead to the colonization of new environments, which may result in adaptation and divergence.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, diversification rates also depend on extinction, with lower extinction rates expected for migratory versus resident taxa because of their broader distributions, larger population sizes (McDowall 2007;Bloom and Lovejoy 2014), and higher genetic diversity (Allibone and Wallis 1993;Ward et al 1994;McDowall 1999;Victoriano et al 2020). Therefore, the broad relationship between migratory status and diversification remains unclear, and the few detailed analyses conducted to date suggest either higher (Rolland et al 2014;Fuchs et al 2015;Corush 2019;Gómez-Bahamón et al 2020) or lower (Tedesco et al 2017) diversification in migratory lineages, or no relationship with migratory status (Kennedy et al 2016). Further research is needed to understand the intricacies of diversification rates and migratory status.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does migration promote or inhibit diversification? A case study involving the dominant radiation of temperate Southern Hemisphere freshwater fishes

Burridge

Waters

2020

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although theory predicts that dispersal has a pivotal influence on speciation and extinction rates, it can have contradictory effects on each, such that empirical quantification of its role is required. In many studies, dispersal reduction appears to promote diversification, although some comparisons of migratory and nonmigratory species suggest otherwise. We tested for a relationship between migratory status and diversification rate within the dominant radiation of temperate Southern Hemisphere freshwater fishes, the Galaxiidae. We reconstructed a molecular phylogeny comprising >95% of extant taxa, and applied State‐dependent Speciation Extinction models to estimate speciation, extinction, and diversification rates. In contrast to some previous studies, we revealed higher diversification rates in nonmigratory lineages. The reduced gene flow experienced by nonmigratory galaxiids appears to have increased diversification under conditions of allopatry or local adaptation. Migratory galaxiid lineages, by contrast, are genetically homogeneous within landmasses, but may also be rarely able to diversify by colonizing other landmasses in the temperate Southern Hemisphere. Apparent contradictions among studies of dispersal‐diversification relationships may be explained by the spatial context of study systems relative to species dispersal abilities, by means of the “intermediate dispersal” model; the accurate quantification of dispersal abilities will aid in the understanding of these proposed interactions.

show abstract