Adaptation, niche conservatism, and convergence: Comparative studies of leaf evolution in the California chaparral

American Naturalist

Volumn 163, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 654-671

  Ackerly, David D ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ancestral state reconstruction; Comparative methods; Leaf size; Mediterranean type climate; Sclerophylly; Specific leaf area

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; DROUGHT; EVOLUTION; LEAF AREA;

ADAPTATION; ARTICLE; CLIMATE; ECOLOGY; EVOLUTION; HISTOLOGY; PLANT; PLANT LEAF; UNITED STATES;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; CALIFORNIA; CLIMATE; ECOLOGY; EVOLUTION; PLANT LEAVES; PLANTS;

CEANOTHUS; HETEROMELES;

EID: 2642513289     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/383062     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. Ackerly, D. D. 1999. Phylogeny and the comparative method in plant functional ecology. Pages 391-413 in M. Press, J. Scholes, and M. G. Barker, eds. Physiological plant ecology. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.
2. _. 2000. Taxon sampling, correlated evolution and independent contrasts. Evolution 54:1480-1492.
3. _. 2003. Community assembly, niche conservatism, and adaptive evolution in changing environments. International Journal of Plant Sciences 164(suppl.):S165-S184.
4. _. 2004. Functional strategies of chaparral shrubs in relation to seasonal water deficit and disturbance. Ecological Monographs 74:25-44.
5. Ackerly, D. D., and M. J. Donoghue. 1998. Leaf size, sapling allometry, and Corner's rules: a phylogenetic study of correlated evolution in maples (Acer). American Naturalist 152:767-791.
6. Ackerly, D. D., and P. B. Reich. 1999. Convergence and correlations among leaf size and function in seed plants: a comparative test using independent contrasts. American Journal of Botany 86:1272-1281.
7. Ackerly D. D., C. A. Knight, S. B. Weiss, K. Barton, and K. P. Starmer. 2002. Leaf size, specific leaf area and microhabitat distribution of woody plants in a California chaparral: contrasting patterns in species level and community level analyses. Oecologia (Berlin) 130:449-457.
8. Axelrod, D. I. 1973. History of the Mediterranean ecosystem in California. Pages 225-305 in F. di Castri and H. A. Mooney, eds. Mediterranean type ecosystems. Springer, Berlin.
9. _. 1975. Evolution and biogeography of Madrean-Tethyan sclerophyll vegetation. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 62:280-334.
10. _. 1989. Age and origin of chaparral. Pages 7-19 in S. C. Keeley, ed. The California chaparral: paradigms revisited. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles.
11. Barbour, M. G., and R. A. Minnich. 1990. The myth of chaparral convergence. Israel Journal of Botany 39:453-463.
12. Baum, D. A., and A. Larson. 1991. Adaptation reviewed: a phylogenetic methodology for studying character macroevolution. Systematic Zoology 40:1-18.
13. Beadle, N. C. W. 1966. Soil phosphate and its role in molding segments of the Australian flora and vegetation, with special reference to xeromorphy and scleromorphy. Ecology 47:992-1007.
14. Blomberg, S. P., and T. Garland, Jr. 2002. Tempo and mode in evolution: phylogenetic inertia, adaptation and comparative methods. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 15:899-910.
15. Blomberg, S. P., T. Garland, Jr., and A. R. Ives. 2003. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57:717-745.
16. Bortiri, E., S.-H. Oh, J. Jiang, S. Baggett, A. Granger, C. Weeks, M. Buckingham, et al. 2001. Phylogeny and systematics of Prunus (Rosaceae) as determined by sequence analysis of ITS and the chloroplast trnL-trnf spacer DNA. Systematic Botany 26:797-807.
17. Campbell, C. S., M. J. Donoghue, B. G. Baldwin, and M. F. Wojciechowski. 1995. Phylogenetic relationships in Maloideae (Rosaceae): evidence from sequences of the internal transcribed spacers of nuclear ribosomal DNA and its congruence with morphology. American Journal of Botany 82:903-918.
18. Chapin, F. S. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11:233-260.
19. Cheverud, J. M., M. M. Dow, and W. Leutnegger. 1985. The quantitative assessment of phylogenetic constraints in comparative analyses: sexual dimorphism in body weight among primates. Evolution 39:1335-1351.
20. Cody, M. L., and H. A. Mooney. 1978. Convergence versus non-convergence in Mediterranean-climate ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 9:265-321.
21. Cooper, W. S. 1922. The broad-sclerophyll vegetation of California: an ecological study of the chaparral and its related communities. Publication 319. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.
22. Cowling, R., and B. Campbell. 1980. Convergence in vegetation structure in the Mediterranean communities of California, Chile and South Africa. Vegetatio 43:191-197.
23. Cunningham, C. W., K. Omland, and T. H. Oakley. 1998. Reconstructing ancestral character states: a critical reappraisal. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13:361-366.
24. Donoghue, M. J., and D. D. Ackerly. 1996. Phylogenetic uncertainties and sensitivity analyses in comparative biology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 351:1241-1249.
25. Dunn, E. L., F. M. Shropshire, L. C. Song, and H. A. Mooney. 1976. The water factor and convergent evolution in Mediterranean-type vegetation. Pages 492-505 in O. L. Lange, L. Kappen, and E.-D. Schulze, eds. Water and plant life. Springer, Berlin.
26. Edwards, C., J. Read, and G. Sanson. 2000. Characterising sclerophylly: some mechanical properties of leaves from heath and forest. Oecologia (Berlin) 123:158-167.
27. Eldredge, N. 1989. Macroevolutionary dynamics. McGraw-Hill, New York.
28. _. 1995. Reinventing Darwin: the great debate at the high table of evolutionary theory. Wiley, New York.
29. Felsenstein, J. 1985. Phylogenies and the comparative method. American Naturalist 125:1-15.
30. Fonseca, C. R., J. M. Overton, B. Collins, and M. Westoby. 2000. Shifts in trait combinations along rainfall and phosphorous gradients. Journal of Ecology 88:964-977.
31. Garland, T., Jr., P. H. Harvey, and A. R. Ives. 1992. Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Systematic Biology 41:18-32.
32. Garnier, E., G. Laurent, A. Bellmann, S. Debain, P. Berthelier, B. Ducout, C. Roumet, et al. 2001. Consistency of species ranking based on functional leaf traits. New Phytologist 152:69-83.
33. Givnish, T. J. 1979. On the adaptive significance of leaf form. Pages 375-407 in O. T. Solbrig, S. Jain, G. B. Johnson, and P. H. Raven, eds. Topics in plant population biology. Columbia University Press, New York.
34. Givnish, T. J., and G. J. Vermeij. 1976. Sizes and shapes of liane leaves. American Naturalist 110:743-778.
35. Gould, S. J., and E. S. Vrba. 1982. Exaptation: a missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology 8:4-15.
36. Groom, P. K., and B. B. Lamont. 1999. Which common indices of sclerophylly best reflect differences in leaf structure? Ecoscience 6:471-474.
37. Grubb, P. J. 1986. Sclerophylls, pachyphylls and pycnophylls: the nature and significance of hard leaf surfaces. Pages 137-150 in B. Juniper and R. Southwood, eds. Insects and the plant surface. Arnold, London.
38. Hardig, T. M., P. S. Soltis, and D. E. Soltis. 2000. Diversification of the North American shrub genus Ceanothus (Rhamnaceae): conflicting phylogenies from nuclear ribosomal DNA and chloroplast DNA. American Journal of Botany 87:108-123.
39. Harvey, P. H., and M. Pagel. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
40. Herrera, C. M. 1992. Historical effects and sorting processes as explanations for contemporary ecological patterns: character syndromes in Mediterranean woody plants. American Naturalist 140:421-446.
41. Hickman, J. C. 1993. The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.
42. Hileman, L. C., M. C. Vasey, and V. T. Parker. 2001. Phylogeny and biogeography of the Arbutoideae (Ericaceae): implications for the Madrean-Tethyan hypothesis. Systematic Botany 26:131-143.
43. Housworth, E. A., and E. P. Martins. 2001. Random sampling of constrained phylogenies: conducting phylogenetic analyses when the phylogeny is partially known. Systematic Biology 50:628-639.
44. Huelsenbeck, J. P., and B. Rannala. 2003. Detecting correlation between characters in a comparative analysis with uncertain phylogeny. Evolution 57:1237-1247.
45. Kalkman, C. 1965. The Old World species of Prunus subgen. Laurocerasus, including those formerly referred to Pygeum. Blumea 13:1-115.
46. Keeley, J. E. 2000. Chaparral. Pages 203-253 in M. G. Barbour and W D. Billings, eds. North American terrestrial vegetation. 2d ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
47. Keeley, S. C., ed. 1989. The California chaparral: paradigms reexamined. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles.
48. Knight, C., and D. D. Ackerly. 2001. Correlated evolution of chloroplast heat shock protein expression in closely related plant species. American Journal of Botany 88:411-418.
49. Lamont, B. B., P. K. Groom, and R. M. Cowling. 2002. High leaf mass per area of related species assemblages may reflect low rainfall and carbon isotope discrimination rather than low phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations. Functional Ecology 16:403-412.
50. Lapointe, E.-J., and T. Garland. 2001. A generalized permutation model for the analysis of cross-species data. Journal of Classification 18:109-127.
51. Larson, A., and J. B. Losos. 1996. Phylogenetic systematics of adaptation. Pages 187-220 in M. R. Rose and G. V. Lauder, eds. Adaptation. Academic Press, San Diego, Calif.
52. Lechowicz, M. J. 1984. Why do temperate deciduous trees leaf out at different times? adaptation and ecology of forest communities. American Naturalist 124:821-842.
53. Lee, S., and J. Wen. 2001. A phylogenetic analysis of Prunus and the Amygdaloideae (Rosaceae) using ITS sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. American Journal of Botany 88:150-160.
54. Leroi, A. M., M. R. Rose, and G. V. Lauder. 1994. What does the comparative method reveal about adaptation? American Naturalist 143:381-402.
55. Losos, J. B. 1994. An approach to the analysis of comparative data when a phylogeny is unavailable or incomplete. Systematic Biology 43:117-123.
56. Losos, J. B., and D. B. Miles. 2002. Testing the hypothesis that a clade has adaptively radiated: iguanid lizard clades as a case study. American Naturalist 160:147-157.
57. Loveless, A. R. 1962. Further evidence to support a nutritional interpretation of sclerophylly. Annals of Botany 26:551-561.
58. Maddison, W. P., and D. R. Maddison. 1992. MacClade, version 3: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
59. Martins, E. P. 1996. Conducting phylogenetic comparative studies when the phylogeny is not known. Evolution 50:12-22.
60. Maynard Smith, J., R. Burian, S. Kauffman, P. Alberch, J. Campbell, B. Goodwin, R. Lande, et al. 1985. Developmental constraints and evolution. Quarterly Review of Biology 60:265-287.
61. McKitrick, M. C. 1993. Phylogenetic constraint in evolutionary theory: has it any explanatory power? Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 24:307-330.
62. McPeek, M. 1995. Testing hypotheses about evolutionary change on single branches of a phylogeny using evolutionary contrasts. American Naturalist 145:686-703.
63. Miller, A. J., D. A. Young, and J. Wen. 2001. Phylogeny and biogeography of Rhus (Anacardiaceae) based on ITS sequence data. International Journal of Plant Sciences 162:1401-1407.
64. Mooney, H. A., and E. L. Dunn. 1970a. Convergent evolution of Mediterranean-climate evergreen sclerophyllous shrubs. Evolution 24:292-303.
65. _. 1970b. Photosynthetic systems of Mediterranean-climate shrubs and trees of California and Chile. American Naturalist 104:447-453.
66. Mooney, H. A., and P. C. Miller. 1985. Chaparral. Pages 213-231 in B. F. Chabot and H. A. Mooney, eds. Physiological ecology of North American plant communities. Chapman & Hall, New York.
67. Mooney, H. A., D. J. Solbrig, and M. L. Cody. 1977a. Introduction. Pages 1-12 in H. A. Mooney, ed. Convergent evolution in California and Chile: Mediterranean climate ecosystems. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Stroudsberg, Pa.
68. Mooney, H. A., J. Kummerow, A. W. Johnson, D. J. Parsons, S. Keeley, A. Hoffman, R. I. Hays, et al. 1977b. The producers: their resources and adaptive responses. Pages 85-143 in H. A. Mooney, ed. Convergent evolution in California and Chile: Mediterranean climate ecosystems. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Stroudsberg, Pa.
69. Morgan, D. R., D. E. Soltis, and K. R. Robertson. 1994. Systematic and evolutionary implications of rbcL sequence variation in Rosaceae. American Journal of Botany 81:890-903.
70. Nardini, A. 2001. Are sclerophylls and malacophylls hydraulically different? Biologia Plantarum 44:239-245.
71. Niinemets, Ü. 2001. Global-scale climatic controls of leaf dry mass per area, density, and thickness in trees and shrubs. Ecology 82:453-469.
72. Niinemets, Ü., and K. Kalevi. 1994. Leaf weight per area and leaf size of 85 Estonian woody species in relation to shade tolerance and light availability. Forest Ecology and Management 70:1-10.
73. Oakley, T. H., and C. W. Cunningham. 2000. Independent contrasts succeed where ancestral reconstruction fails in a known bacteriophage phylogeny. Evolution 54:397-405.
74. Oertli, J. J., S. H. Lips, and M. Agami. 1990. The strength of sclerophyllous cells to resist collapse due to negative turgor pressure. Acta Oecologica 11:281-289.
75. Okali, D. U. U. 1971. Tissue water relations of some woody plant species of the Accra Plains, Ghana. Journal of Ecology 59:89-101.
76. Orzack, S. H., and E. Sober. 1996. How to formulate and test adaptationism. American Naturalist 148:202-210.
77. _. 2001. Adaptation, phylogenetic inertia, and the method of controlled comparisons. Pages 45-63 in S. H. Orzack and E. Sober, eds. Adaptationism and optimality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
78. Parkhurst, D., and O. Loucks. 1972. Optimal leaf size in relation to environment. Journal of Ecology 60:505-537.
79. Parsons, D. J. 1976. Vegetation structure in the Mediterranean scrub communities of California and Chile. Journal of Ecology 64:435-447.
80. Polly, P. D. 2001. Paleontology and the comparative method: ancestral node reconstructions versus observed node values. American Naturalist 157:596-609.
81. Potter, D., F. Gao, E. P. Bortiri, S.-H. Oh, and S. Baggett. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships in Rosaceae inferred from chloroplast matK. and trnL-trnF nucleotide sequence data. Plant Systematics and Evolution 231:77-89.
82. Raven, P. H., and D. I. Axelrod. 1978. Origin and relationships of the California flora. University of California Press, Berkeley.
83. Read, J., and G. D. Sanson. 2003. Characterizing sclerophylly: the mechanical properties of a diverse range of leaf types. New Phytologist 160:81-99.
84. Reeve, H. K., and P. W. Sherman. 1993. Adaptation and the goals of evolutionary research. Quarterly Review of Biology 68:1-32.
85. Reich, P. B., M. B. Walters, and D. S. Ellsworth. 1997. From tropics to tundra: global convergence in plant functioning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 94:13730-13734.
86. Richardson, J. E., M. F. Fay, Q. C. B. Cronk, D. Bowman, and M. W. Chase. 2000. A phylogenetic analysis of Rhamnaceae using rbcL and trnL-f plastid DNA sequences. American Journal of Botany 87:1309-1324.
87. Rundel, P. 1995. Adaptive significance of some morphological and physiological characteristics in Mediterranean plants: facts and fallacies. Pages 119-139 in J. Roy, J. Aronson, and F. di Castri, eds. Time scales of biological responses to water constraints. SP Academic, Amsterdam.
88. Salleo, S., and M. A. Lo Gullo. 1990. Sclerophylly and plant water relations in three Mediterranean Quercus species. Annals of Botany 65:259-270.
89. Schimper, A. F. W. 1903. Plant geography upon a physiological basis. Clarendon, Oxford.
90. Schluter, D., T. Price, A. Mooers, and D. Ludwig. 1997. Likelihood of ancestor states in adaptive radiation. Evolution 51:1699-1711.
91. Schultz, B. B. 1985. Levene's test for relative variation. Systematic Zoology 34:449-456.
92. Schwilk, D., and D. D. Ackerly. 2001. Flammability and serotiny as strategies: correlated evolution in pines. Oikos 94:326-336.
93. Seddon, G. 1974. Xerophytes, xeromorphs, and sclerophylls: the history of some concepts in ecology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 6:65-87.
94. Small, E. 1972. Photosynthetic rates in relation to nitrogen cycling as an adaptation to nutrient deficiency in peat bog plants. Canadian Journal of Botany 50:2227-2233.
95. Specht, R. L., and P. W. Rundel. 1990. Sclerophylly and foliar nutrient status of Mediterranean-climate plant communities in southern Australia. Australian Journal of Botany 38:459-474.
96. Thrower, N. J. W., and D. E. Bradbury. 1977. Chile-California Mediterranean scrub atlas. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Stroudsburg, Pa.
97. Travis, J. 1989. The role of optimizing selection in natural populations. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20:279-296.
98. Turner, I. M. 1994. Sclerophylly: primarily protective? Functional Ecology 8:669-675.
99. Valiente-Banuet, A., N. Flores-Hernández, M. Verdú, and P. Dávila. 1998. The chaparral vegetation of Mexico under non-Mediterranean climate: the convergence and Madrean-Tethyan hypotheses reconsidered. American Journal of Botany 85:1398-1408.
100. Vankat, J. L. 1989. Water stress in chaparral shrubs in summer-rain versus summer-drought climates: whither the Mediterranean-type climate paradigm? Pages 117-124 in S. C. Keeley, ed. The California chaparral: paradigms reexamined. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles.
101. Verdú, M., J. A. Barrón-Sevilla, A. Valiente-Banuet, N. Flores-Hernández, and P. García-Fayos. 2002. Mexical plant phenology: is it similar to Mediterranean communities? Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 138:297-303.
102. Verdú, M., P. Dávila, P. García-Fayos, N. Flores-Hernández, and A. Valiente-Banuet. 2003. "Convergent" traits of Mediterranean woody plants belong to pre-Mediterranean lineages. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 78:415-427.
103. Westoby, M., D. Falster, A. Moles, P. Vesk, and I. Wright. 2002. Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33:125-159.
104. Williams-Linera, G. 1997. Phenology of deciduous and broadleaved- evergreen tree species in a Mexican tropical lower montane forest. Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters 6:115-127.
105. Witkowski, E. T. F., and B. B. Lament. 1991. Leaf specific mass confounds leaf density and thickness. Oecologia (Berlin) 88:486-493.
106. Wolfe, J. A., and H. E. Schorn. 1989. Paleoecologic, paleoclimatic, and evolutionary significance of the Oligocene Creede flora, Colorado. Paleobiology 15:180-198.
107. Wright, I. J., and K. Cannon. 2001. Relationships between leaf lifespan and structural defences in a low-nutrient, sclerophyll flora. Functional Ecology 15:351-359.
108. Wright, I. J., P. B. Reich, and M. Westoby. 2001. Strategy shifts in leaf physiology, structure and nutrient content between species of high- and low-rainfall and high- and low-nutrient habitats. Functional Ecology 15:423-434.