On the need for phylogenetic ‘corrections’ in functional trait-based approaches

Bello, Francesco de; Berg, M.P.; Dias, André T. C.; Diniz‐Filho, José Alexandre Felizola; Götzenberger, Lars; Hortal, Joaquín; Ladle, Richard J.; Lepš, Jan

doi:10.1007/s12224-015-9228-6

Cited by 96 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, consistent with other reviews (Gibson, Espeland, Wagner, & Nelson, 2016), the vast majority of studies involved wild-collected plants or seeds, and thus maternal environment effects almost certainly affected some results (Bischoff & Müller-Schärer, 2010;Espeland, Perkins, Johnson, & Horning, 2016). Though we did not conduct phylogenetic corrections for relatedness among taxa (Harvey & Pagel, 1991;de Bello et al, 2015), our results were essentially identical for signatures 1-3 when we averaged results across species (scores differed by +3%, −1%, and +8%, respectively), suggesting that our lack of phylogenetic corrections are not unduly affecting our results. However, understanding patterns of intraspecific variation across the full range of the species native to the Great Basin is pertinent because it has been common (and for some species, ubiquitous) to utilize sources of native species originating from outside the Great Basin to use for restoration within the Great Basin (Jones & Larson, 2005).…”

Section: Total (592)supporting

confidence: 68%

Strong patterns of intraspecific variation and local adaptation in Great Basin plants revealed through a review of 75 years of experiments

Baughman

Agneray

Forister

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variation in natural selection across heterogeneous landscapes often produces (a) among‐population differences in phenotypic traits, (b) trait‐by‐environment associations, and (c) higher fitness of local populations. Using a broad literature review of common garden studies published between 1941 and 2017, we documented the commonness of these three signatures in plants native to North America's Great Basin, an area of extensive restoration and revegetation efforts, and asked which traits and environmental variables were involved. We also asked, independent of geographic distance, whether populations from more similar environments had more similar traits. From 327 experiments testing 121 taxa in 170 studies, we found 95.1% of 305 experiments reported among‐population differences, and 81.4% of 161 experiments reported trait‐by‐environment associations. Locals showed greater survival in 67% of 24 reciprocal experiments that reported survival, and higher fitness in 90% of 10 reciprocal experiments that reported reproductive output. A meta‐analysis on a subset of studies found that variation in eight commonly measured traits was associated with mean annual precipitation and mean annual temperature at the source location, with notably strong relationships for flowering phenology, leaf size, and survival, among others. Although the Great Basin is sometimes perceived as a region of homogeneous ecosystems, our results demonstrate widespread habitat‐related population differentiation and local adaptation. Locally sourced plants likely harbor adaptations at rates and magnitudes that are immediately relevant to restoration success, and our results suggest that certain key traits and environmental variables should be prioritized in future assessments of plants in this region.

show abstract

Section: Total (592)supporting

confidence: 68%

Strong patterns of intraspecific variation and local adaptation in Great Basin plants revealed through a review of 75 years of experiments

Baughman

Agneray

Forister

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, we chose to adhere to the results without phylogenetic correction in order to cover the full set of documented species. Other studies also indicate that it is not always necessary to apply phylogenetic corrections in trait analyses (Mattila et al 2006(Mattila et al , 2011Päivinen et al 2005;Pavoine et al 2014;Bartonova et al 2014;Leingärtner et al 2014;De Bello et al 2015). This appears especially true for both this and the abovementioned studies that (partly) involve ecologically based traits, such as our climatic niche traits, which are less likely to be evolutionary conserved than morphological traits, such as body size.…”

Section: Phylogenetic Componentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological determinants of butterfly vulnerability across the European continent

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose that this trait component offers a preferable alternative to the frequently used, but ecologically confusing generalist-specialist continuum. Our analysis contributes to the development of trait-based approaches to prioritise vulnerable species for conservation at a European scale. Further regional scale analyses are recommended to improve our understanding of the biological basis of species vulnerability.

show abstract

“…; de Bello et al . ). However, phylogenetic relatedness between species is being increasingly considered not only as a bias to be corrected, but as an evolutionary signal allowing description of patterns and inference of processes at different evolutionary scales (Cavender‐Bares et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Decoupling phylogenetic and functional diversity to reveal hidden signals in community assembly

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Functional traits and phylogeny offer different, and often complementary, information about ecological differences between species, an essential step to uncover biodiversity assembly mechanisms and their feedbacks to ecosystem functions. However, traits and phylogeny are often related due to underlying trait evolution. Consequently, when combined, their shared information can be overemphasized, hindering their complementarity. It is therefore desirable to decouple their unique and overlapping contributions. We propose a conceptual and mathematical framework that produces a set of meaningful measures of ecological differences between species. We test the properties of these measures and the validity of the approach with extensive simulated data to show (i) the information provided by decoupling traits from phylogeny and vice versa, and (ii) that decoupling trait and phylogenetic information can uncover otherwise hidden signals underlying species coexistence and turnover. The application of the approach is further illustrated using a large dataset of Central European meadows as a case study. Decoupling traits and phylogeny particularly reveals the importance of differentiation between phylogenetically related species, which can be essential to understand species replacements along environmental gradients and the combined action of environmental filtering and limiting similarity within communities. Decoupling traits and phylogeny provides an avenue for connecting macro‐evolutionary and local factors affecting coexistence and for understanding how complex species differences affect multiple ecosystem functions. We present an R function called ‘decouple’, which allows a simple and wide application of the framework.

show abstract

On the need for phylogenetic ‘corrections’ in functional trait-based approaches

Cited by 96 publications

References 39 publications

Strong patterns of intraspecific variation and local adaptation in Great Basin plants revealed through a review of 75 years of experiments

Strong patterns of intraspecific variation and local adaptation in Great Basin plants revealed through a review of 75 years of experiments

Ecological determinants of butterfly vulnerability across the European continent

Decoupling phylogenetic and functional diversity to reveal hidden signals in community assembly

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About