z-logo
Premium
The phylogenetic interpretation of biological surveys
Author(s) -
Bell Graham
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
oikos
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.672
H-Index - 179
eISSN - 1600-0706
pISSN - 0030-1299
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00405.x
Subject(s) - similarity (geometry) , outgroup , phylogenetic tree , sister group , biology , taxon , evolutionary biology , phylogenetics , convergent evolution , ecology , paleontology , clade , artificial intelligence , genetics , computer science , gene , image (mathematics)
The ecological attributes of two species may be similar through convergent evolution or common ancestry. The extent of similarity by descent can be evaluated by comparing them with their most closely‐related outgroup in a given phylogeny. I describe a method of nested sister‐group analysis for estimating ecological similarity based on landscape features or on co‐distribution. The phylogeny is dissected into triplets, each comprising two sister taxa and their outgroup. For a triplet at any phylogenetic level, the similarity of sister groups with respect to some given character can be compared with their joint similarity to the outgroup to give a single test of similarity by descent. Each comparison is independent, and the full set of triplets provides a complete accounting of phylogenetic variation at all levels. This procedure was applied to 188 moderately abundant species of dicots in two independent surveys from adjoining districts of midland England, supplemented by physical surveys of landscape attributes obtained from digitized maps of the same districts. The co‐distribution of sister species was consistently more positive than the co‐distribution of random species pairs, demonstrating the existence of a phylogenetic signal at some level. When sister species are compared with their most closely‐related outgroup, however, neither landscape attributes nor co‐distribution showed any overall similarity arising from common ancestry, in the sense that ecological attributes are not generally conserved after lineage splitting. Instead, the distribution of similarity is strikingly similar to random data. The lack of ecological similarity between closely‐related groups was attributed to rapid character change at or shortly after the splitting of lineages, coupled with a lack of correlation between successive lineage splits.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here