English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The emergence of the Isthmus of Panama left a major imprint on the biodiversity of the Americas. The connection between South and North America facilitated dispersal of terrestrial and freshwater organisms, while separating marine species between the eastern Pacific and Caribbean seas. Recent geological data have questioned the long-standing view of a Pliocene emergence of the Isthmus (1) and show that the Central American Seaway, defined as the deep oceanic seaway along the tectonic boundary of the South American plate and Panama arc, was already closed by 15–13 Ma (2). Caribbean–Pacific shallow water exchange probably continued, albeit intermittently, until a full closure at 3.5 Ma (1⇓–3). Recently Bacon et al. (3) used molecular and fossil data to evaluate the timing, tempo, and directionality of biotic exchange and vicariance across the Isthmus, and tested whether biological data are congruent with recent geological evidence. Significant increases in terrestrial dispersals were found at ca. 20 and 6 Ma, and increases in marine vicariance at ca. 23 and 7 Ma. Similar patterns prevailed despite intrinsic differences among the taxonomic groups surveyed. This led Bacon et al. (3) to reject the assumption of a single closure of the Isthmus at ca. 3.5 Ma in favor of an older, more complex model of land emergence and biotic interchange. Letters to the Editor by Lessios (4) and Marko et al. (5) point to the possibility that the results and conclusions presented by Bacon et al. (3) are compromised by the underlying data used in the analyses, particularly with respect to marine taxa. We address …

Reply to Lessios and Marko et al.: Early and progressive migration across the Isthmus of Panama is robust to missing data and biases