Factors influencing changes in trait correlations across species after using phylogenetic independent contrasts

Evolutionary Ecology

Volumn 20, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 591-602

  Carvalho, Priscilla ^a   Diniz Filho, José Alexandre Felizola ^a,b   Bini, Luis Mauricio ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF GOIÁS   (Brazil)

^b PONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DE GOIÁS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Branch transformation; Brownian motion; Felsenstein; Phylogenetic independent contrasts method; Phylogenetic signal; Trait category

Indexed keywords

CORRELATION; DATA SET; PHYLOGENETICS; PHYLOGENY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TAXONOMY;

EID: 33750710123     PISSN: 02697653     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10682-006-9119-7     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Ackerly DD (1999) Comparative plant ecology and the role of phylogenetic information. In: Press MC, Scholes JD, Barker, MG (eds) Physiological plant ecology. Blackwell Science, pp391-413
2. Ackerly DD, Donoghue MJ (1998) Leaf size, sapling allometry, and Corner's rules: Phylogeny and Correlated Evolution in Maples (Acer). Am Nat 152:767-791
3. Bennett PM, Owens IPF (2002) Evolutionary ecology of birds: life histories, mating systems an extinction. Oxford University Press, New York
4. Björklund M (1997) Are "comparative methods" always necessary? Oikos 80:607-612
5. Blomberg SP, Garland T Jr, Ives AR (2003) Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57:717-745
6. Carvalho P, Diniz-Filho JAF, Bini LM (2005) The impact of Felsenstein's "Phylogenies and the comparative method" on evolutionary biology. Scientometrics 62:53-66
7. Cheverud JM, Dow MM, Leutenegger W (1985) The quantitative assessment of phylogenetic constraints in comparative analyses: sexual dimorphism in body weight among primates. Evolution 39:1335-1351
8. Díaz-Uriarte R, Garland T Jr (1996) Testing hypotheses of correlated evolution using phylogenetic independent contrasts: sensitivity to deviations from Brownian Motion. Syst Biol 45:27-47
9. Díaz-Uriarte R, Garland T Jr (1998) Effects of branch length errors on the performance of phylogenetically independent contrasts. Syst Biol 47:654-672
10. Diniz-Filho JAF (2001) Phylogenetic autocorrelation under distinct evolutionary processes. Evolution 55:1104-1109
11. Diniz-Filho JAF, Tô rres NM (2002) Phylogenetic comparative methods and the geographic range size - body size relationship in new world terrestrial carnivora. Evol Ecol 16:351-367
12. Diniz-Filho JAF, de Sant'Ana CER, Bini LM (1998) An eigenvector method for estimating phylogenetic inertia. Evolution 52:1247-1262
13. Felsenstein J (1985) Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am Nat 125:1-15
14. Freckleton RP, Harvey PH, Pagel M (2002) Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. Am Nat 160:712-26
15. Garland T Jr, Adolph SC (1994) Why not to do two-species comparative studies: limitations on inferring adaptation. Physiol Zool 67:797-828
16. Garland T Jr, Harvey PH, Ives AR (1992) Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Syst Biol 41:18-32
17. Gittleman JL, Anderson CG, Kot M, Luh H-K (1996) Phylogenetic lability and rates of evolution: a comparison of behavioral, morphological and life history traits. In: Martins EP (ed) Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior. Oxford University Press, pp166-205
18. Harvey PH, Pagel MD (1991) The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press
19. Losos JB (1999) Uncertainty in the reconstruction of ancestral carácter states and limitations on the use of phylogenetic comparative methods. Anim Behav 58:1319-1324
20. Manly BFJ (1994). The design and analysis of research studies. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge
21. Martins EP, Garland T Jr (1991) Phylogenetic analyses of the correlated evolution of continuous characters: a simulation study. Evolution 45:534-57
22. Martins EP, Hansen TF (1996) The statistical analysis of interspecific data: a review and evaluation of phylogenetic comparative methods. In: Martins EP (ed) Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior, Oxford University Press, pp22-75
23. Martins EP, Diniz-Filho JAF, Housworth EA (2002) Adaptative constraints and the phylogenetic comparative method: a computer simulation test. Evolution 56:1-13
24. Mazer SJ (1998) Alternative approaches to the analysis of comparative data: compare and contrast. Am J Bot 85:1194-1199
25. Morales E (2000) Estimating phylogenetic inertia in Tithonia (Asteraceae): a comparative approach. Evolution 54:475-484
26. Peters RH (1993) The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
27. Pigliucci M (2003) Phenotypic integration: studying the ecology and evolution of complex phenotypes. Ecol Lett 6:265-272
28. Pigliucci M, Kolodynska A (2002) Phenotypic plasticity to light intensity in Arabidopsis thaliana: invariance of reaction norms and phenotypic Integration. Evol Ecol 16:27-47
29. Purvis A, Garland T Jr (1993) Polytomies in comparative analyses of continuous characters. Syst Biol 42:569-575
30. Rezende EL, Garland T Jr (2003) Comparaciones interespecíficas y métodos estadísticos filogenéticos. In: F Bozinovic (eds) Fisiología Ecológica & Evolutiva. Teoría y casos de estudios en animals. Ediciones Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, pp79-98
31. Ricklefs RE, Starck JM (1996) Applications of phylogenetically independent contrasts: a mixed progress report. Oikos 77:167-172
32. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. WH Freeman and Company, New York
33. Stirling DG, Réale D, Roff DA (2002) Selection, structure and the heritability of behavior. J Evol Biol 15:277-289
34. Weathers WW, Siegel RB (1995) Body size establishes the scaling of avian postnatal metabolic rate: an interspecific analysis using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Ibis 137:532-542
35. Westoby M, Leishman MR, Lord JM (1995) On misinterpreting the "phylogenetic correction". J Ecol 83:531-534