A phylogenetic hot spot for evolutionary novelty in Middle American treefrogs

Evolution

Volumn 61, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 2075-2085

  Smith, Sarah A ^a   Arif, Saad ^a   De Oca, Adrian Nieto Montes ^b   Wiens, John J ^a  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Amphibians; Heterochrony; Homoplasy; Novelty; Phylogeny; Skull morphology

Indexed keywords

FROG; MITOCHONDRION; MORPHOLOGY; PHYLOGENETICS; PHYLOGENY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; FROGS AND TOADS; GENETICS; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HISTOLOGY; MALE; PHYLOGENY; SKULL;

ANIMALS; ANURA; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BODY SIZE; MALE; PHYLOGENY; SKULL;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; HYLA; TETRAPODA;

EID: 34548327148     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00173.x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Ackerly, D. D. 2006. Analysis of traits (AOT), version 3.1. A module of Phylocom version 3.40 by C. O. Webb, D. D. Ackerly, S. W. Kembel. Available at http://www.phylodiversity.net/phylocom.
2. Alberch, P., and J. Alberch. 1981. Heterochronic mechanisms of morphological diversification and evolutionary change in the Neotropical salamander, Bolitoglossa occidentalis (Amphibia: Plethodontidae). J. Morphol. 167 : 249 264.
3. Alberch, P., S. J. Gould, G. F. Oster, and D. B. Wake. 1979. Size and shape in ontogeny and phylogeny. Paleobiology 5 : 296 317.
4. Alfaro, M. E., S. Zoller, and F. Lutzoni. 2003. Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence. Mol. Biol. Evol. 20 : 255 266.
5. Brandley, M. C., A. Schmitz, and T. W. Reeder. 2005. Partitioned Bayesian analyses, partition choice, and the phylogenetic relationships of scincid lizards. Syst. Biol. 54 : 373 390.
6. Carroll, R. L. 1988. Vertebrate paleontology and evolution. W. H. Freeman, New York.
7. Carroll, S. B., J. K. Grenier, and S. D. Weatherbee. 2005. From DNA to diversity. Molecular genetics and the evolution of animal design. 2nd ed. Blackwell Scientific, Malden, MA.
8. Duellman, W. E. 1974. A reassessment of the taxonomic status of some Neotropical hylid frogs. Occ. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas 27 : 1 27.
9. Duellman, W. E. 2001. Hylid frogs of Middle America. 2nd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Lawrence, KS.
10. Duellman, W. E., and L. Trueb. 1986. Biology of amphibians. McGraw-Hill, New York.
11. Faivovich, J., C. F. B. Haddad, P. C. A. Garcia, D. R. Frost, J. A. Campbell, and W. C. Wheeler. 2005. Systematic review of the frog family Hylidae, with special reference to Hylinae: phylogenetic analysis and taxonomic revision. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 294 : 1 240.
12. Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39 : 783 791.
13. Futuyma, D. J. 2005. Evolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
14. Hanken, J. 1985. Morphological novelty in the limb skeleton accompanies miniaturization in salamanders. Science 229 : 871 874.
15. Hanken, J., and B. K. Hall (eds 1993. The skull. Vol. 2. Patterns of structural and systematic diversity. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
16. Hillis, D. M., and J. J. Bull. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42 : 182 192.
17. Huelsenbeck, J. P., and B. Rannala. 2004. Frequentist properties of Bayesian posterior probabilities. Syst. Biol. 53 : 904 913.
18. Huelsenbeck, J. P., and F. Ronquist. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics 17 : 754 755.
19. Jablonski, D. 2005. Evolutionary innovations in the fossil record: the intersection of ecology, development, and macroevolution. J. Exp. Zool. B (Mol. Dev. Evol.) 304B : 504 519.
20. Jared, C., M. M. Antoniazzi, C. A. Navas, E. Katchburian, E. Freymuller, D. V. Tambourgi, and M. T. Rodrigues. 2005. Head co-ossification, phragmosis, and defense in the casque-headed treefrog Corythomantis greeningi. J. Zool., Lond. 265 : 1 8.
21. Lewis, P. O. 2001. A likelihood approach to inferring phylogeny from discrete morphological characters. Syst. Biol. 50 : 913 925.
22. Maddison, D. R., and W. P. Maddison. 2000. MacClade 4.0. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
23. Maddison, D. R., and W. P. Maddison. 2004. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 1.05 http://mesquiteproject.org.
24. Maddison, W. P. 1997. Gene trees in species trees. Syst. Biol. 46 : 523 536.
25. Müller, G. B., and S. A. Newman. 2005. The innovation triad: an evodevo agenda. J. Exp. Zool. B (Mol. Dev. Evol.) 304B : 487 503.
26. Müller, G. B., and G. P. Wagner. 1991. Novelty in evolution: restructuring the concept. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22 : 229 256.
27. Nylander, J. A. A. 2004. MrModeltest 2.0. Program distributed by the author. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala Univ. Available at http://www.ebc.uu.se/systzoo/staff/nylander.html
28. Nylander, J. A. A., F. Ronquist, J. P. Huelsenbeck, and J. L. Nieves-Aldrey. 2004. Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of combined data. Syst. Biol. 53 : 47 67.
29. Pagel, M. 1994. Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 255 : 37 45.
30. Pagel, M. 1998. Inferring evolutionary processes from phylogenies. Zool. Script. 26 : 331 348.
31. Pramuk, J. B. 2000. Prenasal bones and snout morphology in West Indian bufonids and the Bufo granulosus species group. J. Herpetol. 2 : 334 340.
32. Sanderson, M. J. 1991. In search of homoplastic tendencies: statistical tests for patterns in the topological distribution of homoplasy. Evolution 45 : 351 358.
33. Sanderson, M. J. 2002. Estimating absolute rates of molecular evolution and divergence times: a penalized likelihood approach. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19 : 101 109.
34. Smith, S. A., A. Nieto Montes de Oca, T. W. Reeder, and J. J. Wiens. 2007. A phylogenetic perspective on elevational species richness patterns in Middle American treefrogs: why so few species in lowland tropical rainforests? Evolution. 61 : 1188 1207.
35. Smith, S. A., P. R. Stephens, and J. J. Wiens. 2005. Replicate patterns of species richness, historical biogeography, and phylogeny in Holarctic treefrogs. Evolution 59 : 2433 2450.
36. Swofford, D. L. 2002. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony*, version 4.0b10. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.
37. Thompson, J. D., D. G. Higgins, and T. J. Gibson. 1994. CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic. Acids Res. 22 : 4673 4680.
38. Trueb, L. 1970. Evolutionary relationships of casque-headed treefrogs with co-ossified skulls. Publ. Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. 18 : 547 716.
39. Trueb, L. 1993. Patterns of cranial diversity among the Lissamphibia. Pp. 255 343 in J. Hanken and B. K. Hall, eds. The skull. Vol. 2. Patterns of structural and systematic diversity. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
40. Trueb, L., and M. J. Tyler. 1974. Systematics and evolution of the Greater Antillean hylid frogs. Occ. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas 24 : 1 60.
41. Webb, C. O., D. D. Ackerly, and S. W. Kembel. 2006. Phylocom: software for the analysis of community phylogenetic structure and trait evolution. Version 3.40. Available at http://www.phylodiversity.net/phylocom/
42. Webb, C. O., D. D. Ackerly, M. A. McPeek, and M. J. Donoghue. 2002. Phylogenies and community ecology. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33 : 475 505.
43. Wiens, J. J., R. M. Bonett, and P. T. Chippindale. 2005b. Ontogeny discombobulates phylogeny: paedomorphosis and higher-level salamander relationships. Syst. Biol. 54 : 91 110.
44. Wiens, J. J., J. W. Fetzner, C. L. Parkinson, and T. W. Reeder. 2005a. Hylid frog phylogeny and sampling strategies for speciose clades. Syst. Biol. 54 : 719 748.
45. Wiens, J. J., C. H. Graham, D. S. Moen, S. A. Smith, and T. W. Reeder. 2006. Evolutionary and ecological causes of the latitudinal diversity gradient in hylid frogs: treefrog trees unearth the roots of high tropical diversity. Am. Nat. 168 : 579 596.
46. Wilcox, T. P., D. J. Zwickl, T. A. Heath, and D. M. Hillis. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships of the dwarf boas and a comparison of Bayesian and bootstrap measures of phylogenetic support. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 25 : 361 371.
47. Yeh, J. 2002. The effect of miniaturized body size on skeletal morphology in frogs. Evolution 56 : 628 641.