Phylogenetic comparative approaches for studying niche conservatism

Cooper, Natalie; Jetz, Walter; Freckleton, Robert P.

doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02144.x

Cited by 188 publications

(290 citation statements)

References 91 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

284

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1, indicating that these traits are phylogenetically conserved (cf. [10,35]). Across trait categories, phylogenetic signal tended to be highest in brain mass and life history, followed by proxies for sexual selection, ranging behaviour and activity budget, with diet, social organization and climatic niche variables consistently exhibiting the weakest phylogenetic signal.…”

Section: Results and Discussion (A) Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…data and phylogeny) dependent and can be influenced by scale, convergent evolution, taxonomic inflation and cryptic species [10]. Because of this, using K or l (or any other measure of phylogenetic signal) to infer evolutionary processes or rates must be performed with consideration of the traits involved, the hypotheses to be tested and any available external information [35]. Note that this only applies to studies whose aim is to quantify and report measures of phylogenetic signal.…”

Section: How Is Phylogenetic Signal Interpreted?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Phylogenetic signal in primate behaviour, ecology and life history

Kamilar

Cooper

2013

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

433

380

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examining biological diversity in an explicitly evolutionary context has been the subject of research for several decades, yet relatively recent advances in analytical techniques and the increasing availability of species-level phylogenies, have enabled scientists to ask new questions. One such approach is to quantify phylogenetic signal to determine how trait variation is correlated with the phylogenetic relatedness of species. When phylogenetic signal is high, closely related species exhibit similar traits, and this biological similarity decreases as the evolutionary distance between species increases. Here, we first review the concept of phylogenetic signal and suggest how to measure and interpret phylogenetic signal in species traits. Second, we quantified phylogenetic signal in primates for 31 variables, including body mass, brain size, life-history, sexual selection, social organization, diet, activity budget, ranging patterns and climatic variables. We found that phylogenetic signal varies extensively across and even within trait categories. The highest values are exhibited by brain size and body mass, moderate values are found in the degree of territoriality and canine size dimorphism, while low values are displayed by most of the remaining variables. Our results have important implications for the evolution of behaviour and ecology in primates and other vertebrates.

show abstract

Section: Results and Discussion (A) Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: How Is Phylogenetic Signal Interpreted?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic signal in primate behaviour, ecology and life history

Kamilar

Cooper

2013

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

433

380

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The last few years have seen an explosion of research into phylogenetic niche conservatism (PNC), the phenomenon that species tend to retain ancestral ecological niche characteristics (Cooper et al, 2010;Wiens et al, 2010). As with "phylogenetic constraint," confusion exists over whether PNC is a pattern or a process.…”

Section: Phylogenetic Niche Conservatismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing the Forest for the Trees: The Limitations of Phylogenies in Comparative Biology

Losos

2011

The American Naturalist

246

241

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last 30 years have seen a revolution in comparative biology. Prior to that time, systematics was not at the forefront of the biological sciences, and few scientists considered phylogenetic relationships when investigating evolutionary questions. By contrast, systematic biology is now one of the most vigorous disciplines in biology, and the use of phylogenies is not only requisite in macroevolutionary studies, but has been applied to a wide range of topics and fields that no one could possibly have envisioned 30 years ago. My message is simple: phylogenies are fundamental to comparative biology, but they are not the be all and end all. Phylogenies are powerful tools for understanding the past, but like any tool, they have their limitations. In addition, phylogenies are much more informative about pattern than they are about process. The best way to fully understand the past-both pattern and process-is to integrate phylogenies with other types of historical data as well as with direct studies of evolutionary process. 3I start with two observations about evolutionary biology. First, as attendance at the 2010 joint meeting of the American Society of Naturalists, the Society for the Study of Evolution, and the Society of Systematic Biologists attests, evolutionary biology is a thriving science. One sign of the health of this science, evident to any participant at the meeting, is the number of young people entering the field. This leads to my second observation. Evolutionary biology is inherently about history, the progression of life through time.Given these two points, I begin my essay by providing a service to the younger members of the field. In my ASN Presidential Address (from which this essay is adapted), I asked all members of the audience born since 1980 to raise their hands. My estimate, looking out upon the assembled masses, was that approximately 61.31% of the audience (was in this fledgling class. 1 These young workers, then, do not personally know the field of evolutionary biology before the year 2000 or so, much less what it was like in the 1970's, before their birth. So, in the spirit of a historical science, I briefly review what life was like in that ancient time. A Short History of Modern Comparative ApproachesAhh, the 1970's: bell bottoms and big hair. Disco, Abba and Led Zep. Happy Days, Grease, and Star Wars. Tricky Dick and Watergate. Not to mention the Oil Embargo (the result of a time when we relied on oil imported from the Middle East for much of our energy).But what about evolutionary biology? In particular, the more historical, systematic, macroevolutionary side of the field, which is so vibrant today. What was it like? In a word, it was non-existent. The importance of a historical, evolutionary perspective was realized, at least by some (e.g., Mayr, 1976), but systematics itself was a scientific backwater. The construction of phylogenies often was more an art than a science; evolutionary trees were constructed using simplistic algorithms or none at all. The use of phylogenies t...

show abstract

“…However, with respect to ecological attributes, phylogenetic niche conservatism is best seen as an evolutionary conjecture, which stipulates that closely related species should be more ecologically similar than expected based on the timing of their phylogenetic divergence [22,39]. As a hypothesis, it is usually tested by measuring a statistical pattern known as the phylogenetic signal, which corresponds to the degree of phylogenetic dependence of a given character [40]; a null phylogenetic signal simply indicates that the character is totally independent from the phylogeny.…”

Section: Measuring Phylogenetic Influences On Parasite Ecology (A) Phmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several methods have been proposed for the detection of phylogenetic signals, all using a slightly different approach to compare the distribution of trait values among the branch tips in a phylogenetic tree to that expected from some null model [39][40][41][42][43]. Each method has its own merits and disadvantages.…”

Section: Measuring Phylogenetic Influences On Parasite Ecology (A) Phmentioning

confidence: 99%

The comparative ecology and biogeography of parasites

Poulin

Krasnov

Mouillot

et al. 2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparative ecology uses interspecific relationships among traits, while accounting for the phylogenetic non-independence of species, to uncover general evolutionary processes. Applied to biogeographic questions, it can be a powerful tool to explain the spatial distribution of organisms. Here, we review how comparative methods can elucidate biogeographic patterns and processes, using analyses of distributional data on parasites (fleas and helminths) as case studies. Methods exist to detect phylogenetic signals, i.e. the degree of phylogenetic dependence of a given character, and either to control for these signals in statistical analyses of interspecific data, or to measure their contribution to variance. Parasite-host interactions present a special case, as a given trait may be a parasite trait, a host trait or a property of the coevolved association rather than of one participant only. For some analyses, it is therefore necessary to correct simultaneously for both parasite phylogeny and host phylogeny, or to evaluate which has the greatest influence on trait expression. Using comparative approaches, we show that two fundamental properties of parasites, their niche breadth, i.e. host specificity, and the nature of their life cycle, can explain interspecific and latitudinal variation in the sizes of their geographical ranges, or rates of distance decay in the similarity of parasite communities. These findings illustrate the ways in which phylogenetically based comparative methods can contribute to biogeographic research.

show abstract

Phylogenetic comparative approaches for studying niche conservatism

Cited by 188 publications

References 91 publications

Phylogenetic signal in primate behaviour, ecology and life history

Phylogenetic signal in primate behaviour, ecology and life history

Seeing the Forest for the Trees: The Limitations of Phylogenies in Comparative Biology

The comparative ecology and biogeography of parasites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About