Ring distributions leading to species formation: a global topographic analysis of geographic barriers associated with ring species

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the mid 20^thcentury, Ernst Mayr and Theodosius Dobzhansky championed the significance of circular overlaps or ring species as the perfect demonstration of speciation, yet in the over 50 years since, only a handful of such taxa are known. We developed a topographic model to evaluate whether the geographic barriers that favor processes leading to ring species are common or rare, and to predict where other candidate ring barriers might be found.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 952,147 geographic barriers identified on the planet, only about 1% are topographically similar to barriers associated with known ring taxa, with most of the likely candidates occurring in under-studied parts of the world (for example, marine environments, tropical latitudes). Predicted barriers separate into two distinct categories: (i) single cohesive barriers (< 50,000 km²), associated with taxa that differentiate at smaller spatial scales (salamander: <it>Ensatina eschscholtzii</it>; tree: <it>Acacia karroo</it>); and (ii) composite barriers - formed by groups of barriers (each 184,000 to 1.7 million km²) in close geographic proximity (totaling 1.9 to 2.3 million km²) - associated with taxa that differentiate at larger spatial scales (birds: <it>Phylloscopus trochiloide</it>s and <it>Larus </it>(sp. <it>argentatus </it>and <it>fuscus</it>)). When evaluated globally, we find a large number of cohesive barriers that are topographically similar to those associated with known ring taxa. Yet, compared to cohesive barriers, an order of magnitude fewer composite barriers are similar to those that favor ring divergence in species with higher dispersal.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>While these findings confirm that the topographic conditions that favor evolutionary processes leading to ring speciation are, in fact, rare, they also suggest that many understudied natural systems could provide valuable demonstrations of continuous divergence towards the formation of new species. Distinct advantages of the model are that it (i) requires no <it>a priori </it>information on the relative importance of features that define barriers, (ii) can be replicated using any kind of continuously distributed environmental variable, and (iii) generates spatially explicit hypotheses of geographic species formation. The methods developed here - combined with study of the geographical ecology and genetics of taxa in their environments - should enable recognition of ring species phenomena throughout the world.</p

Tree thinking cannot taken for granted: challenges for teaching phylogenetics

Tree thinking is an integral part of modern evolutionary biology, and a necessary precondition for phylogenetics and comparative analyses. Tree thinking has during the 20th century largely replaced group thinking, developmental thinking and anthropocentricism in biology. Unfortunately, however, this does not imply that tree thinking can be taken for granted. The findings reported here indicate that tree thinking is very much an acquired ability which needs extensive training. I tested a sample of undergraduate and graduate students of biology by means of questionnaires. Not a single student was able to correctly interpret a simple tree drawing. Several other findings demonstrate that tree thinking is virtually absent in students unless they are explicitly taught how to read evolutionary trees. Possible causes and implications of this mental bias are discussed. It seems that biological textbooks can be an important source of confusion for students. While group and developmental thinking have disappeared from most textual representations of evolution, they have survived in the evolutionary tree drawings of many textbooks. It is quite common for students to encounter anthropocentric trees and even trees containing stem groups and paraphyla. While these biases originate from the unconscious philosophical assumptions made by authors, the findings suggest that presenting unbiased evolutionary trees in biological publications is not merely a philosophical virtue but has also clear practical implications

Relationships of Cetacea (Artiodactyla) Among Mammals: Increased Taxon Sampling Alters Interpretations of Key Fossils and Character Evolution

BACKGROUND: Integration of diverse data (molecules, fossils) provides the most robust test of the phylogeny of cetaceans. Positioning key fossils is critical for reconstructing the character change from life on land to life in the water. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We reexamine relationships of critical extinct taxa that impact our understanding of the origin of Cetacea. We do this in the context of the largest total evidence analysis of morphological and molecular information for Artiodactyla (661 phenotypic characters and 46,587 molecular characters, coded for 33 extant and 48 extinct taxa). We score morphological data for Carnivoramorpha, Creodonta, Lipotyphla, and the raoellid artiodactylan Indohyus and concentrate on determining which fossils are positioned along stem lineages to major artiodactylan crown clades. Shortest trees place Cetacea within Artiodactyla and close to Indohyus, with Mesonychia outside of Artiodactyla. The relationships of Mesonychia and Indohyus are highly unstable, however--in trees only two steps longer than minimum length, Mesonychia falls inside Artiodactyla and displaces Indohyus from a position close to Cetacea. Trees based only on data that fossilize continue to show the classic arrangement of relationships within Artiodactyla with Cetacea grouping outside the clade, a signal incongruent with the molecular data that dominate the total evidence result. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Integration of new fossil material of Indohyus impacts placement of another extinct clade Mesonychia, pushing it much farther down the tree. The phylogenetic position of Indohyus suggests that the cetacean stem lineage included herbivorous and carnivorous aquatic species. We also conclude that extinct members of Cetancodonta (whales+hippopotamids) shared a derived ability to hear underwater sounds, even though several cetancodontans lack a pachyostotic auditory bulla. We revise the taxonomy of living and extinct artiodactylans and propose explicit node and stem-based definitions for the ingroup

On species delimitation: Yet another lemur species or just genetic variation?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although most taxonomists agree that species are independently evolving metapopulation lineages that should be delimited with several kinds of data, the taxonomic practice in Malagasy primates (Lemuriformes) looks quite different. Several recently described lemur species are based solely on evidence of genetic distance and diagnostic characters of mitochondrial DNA sequences sampled from a few individuals per location. Here we explore the validity of this procedure for species delimitation in lemurs using published sequence data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We show that genetic distance estimates and <it>Population Aggregation Analysis </it>(PAA) are inappropriate for species delimitation in this group of primates. Intra- and interspecific genetic distances overlapped in 14 of 17 cases independent of the genetic marker used. A simulation of a fictive taxonomic study indicated that for the mitochondrial D-loop the minimum required number of individuals sampled per location is 10 in order to avoid false positives via PAA.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Genetic distances estimates and PAA alone should not be used for species delimitation in lemurs. Instead, several nuclear and sex-specific loci should be considered and combined with other data sets from morphology, ecology or behavior. Independent of the data source, sampling should be done in a way to ensure a quantitative comparison of intra- and interspecific variation of the taxa in question. The results of our study also indicate that several of the recently described lemur species should be reevaluated with additional data and that the number of good species among the currently known taxa is probably lower than currently assumed.</p

What's in a name; Genetic structure in Solanum section Petota studied using population-genetic tools

Background - The taxonomy and systematic relationships among species of Solanum section Petota are complicated and the section seems overclassified. Many of the presumed (sub)species from South America are very similar and they are able to exchange genetic material. We applied a population genetic approach to evaluate support for subgroups within this material, using AFLP data. Our approach is based on the following assumptions: (i) accessions that may exchange genetic material can be analyzed as if they are part of one gene pool, and (ii) genetic differentiation among species is expected to be higher than within species. Results - A dataset of 566 South-American accessions (encompassing 89 species and subspecies) was analyzed in two steps. First, with the program STRUCTURE 2.2 in an 'unsupervised' procedure, individual accessions were assigned to inferred clusters based on genetic similarity. The results showed that the South American members of section Petota could be arranged in 16 clusters of various size and composition. Next, the accessions within the clusters were grouped by maximizing the partitioning of genetic diversity among subgroups (i.e., maximizing Fst values) for all available individuals of the accessions (2767 genotypes). This two-step approach produced an optimal partitioning into 44 groups. Some of the species clustered as genetically distinct groups, either on their own, or combined with one or more other species. However, accessions of other species were distributed over more than one cluster, and did not form genetically distinct units. Conclusions - We could not find any support for 43 species (almost half of our dataset). For 28 species some level of support could be found varying from good to weak. For 18 species no conclusions could be drawn as the number of accessions included in our dataset was too low. These molecular data should be combined with data from morphological surveys, with geographical distribution data, and with information from crossing experiments to identify natural units at the species level. However, the data do indicate which taxa or combinations of taxa are clearly supported by a distinct set of molecular marker data, leaving other taxa unsupported. Therefore, the approach taken provides a general method to evaluate the taxonomic system in any species complex for which molecular data are available