Little evidence for Cope's rule from Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of extant mammals

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 23, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 2017-2021

  Monroe, M J ^a   Bokma, F ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bayesian models; Body size; Macroevolution; Phylogenetics; Present day species

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; BODY MASS; BODY SIZE; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; EXTINCTION; FOSSIL; MAMMAL; NUMERICAL MODEL; PHYLOGENETICS;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BODY SIZE; EVOLUTION; FOSSIL; PHYLOGENY; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; BODY SIZE; FOSSILS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHYLOGENY;

MAMMALIA;

EID: 77955932544     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02051.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Alroy J. Cope's rule and the dynamics of body mass evolution in north American mammals. Science 1998, 280:731-734.
2. Benton M. Cope's rule. Encyclopedia of Evolution 2002, 185-186. Pagel M. ed, Oxford University Press, New York
3. Bininda-Emonds ORP, Cardillo M, Jones KE, MacPhee RDE, Beck RMD, Grenyer R, Price SA, Vos RA, Gittleman JL, Purvis A. The delayed rise of present-day mammals. Nature 2007, 446:507-512.
4. Bininda-Emonds ORP, Cardillo M, Jones KE, MacPhee RDE, Beck RMD, Grenyer R, Price SA, Vos RA, Gittleman JL, Purvis A. Corrgendium: the delayed rise of present-day mammals. Nature 2008, 456:274.
5. Bokma F. Detection of " punctuated equilibrium" by Bayesian estimation of speciation and extinction rates, ancestral character states, and rates of anagenetic and cladogenetic evolution of a molecular phylogeny. Evolution 2008, 62:2718-2726.
6. Butler R, Goswami A. Body size evolution in Mesozoic birds: little evidence for cope's rule. J. Evol. Biol. 2008, 21:1673-1682.
7. Clauset A, Erwin D. The evolution and distribution of species body size. Science 2008, 321:399-401.
8. Cope E. The Origin of the Fittest 1887, Appleton, New York
9. Ereshefsky M. Linnaean ranks: vestiges of a bygone era. Philos. Sci. 2002, 69:S305-S315.
10. Finarelli JA, Flynn JJ. Ancestral state reconstruction of body size in the Caniformia (Carnivora, Mammalia): the effects of incorporating data from the fossil record. Syst. Biol. 2006, 55:301-313.
11. Gingerich P. Stratigraphic record of early Eocene Hypsodus and the geometry of mammalian phylogeny. Nature 1974, 248:107-109.
12. Hone D, Benton M. The evolution of large size: how does Cope's rule work? Trends Ecol. Evol. 2005, 20:4-6.
13. Hone D, Benton M. Cope's rule in the pterosauria, and differing perceptions of Cope's rule at different taxonomic levels. J. Evol. Biol. 2007, 20:1164-1170.
14. Hone DWE, Keesey TM, Pisani D, Purvis A. Macroevolutionary trends in the dinosauria: Cope's rule. J. Evol. Biol. 2005, 18:587-595.
15. Hone DWE, Dyke GJ, Haden M, Benton M. Body size evolution in mesozoic birds. J. Evol. Biol. 2008, 21:618-624.
16. Jablonski D. Body-size evolution in cretaceous molluscs and the status of Cope's rule. Nature 1997, 385:250-252.
17. Kingsolver J, Pfennig D. Individual-level selection as a cause of Cope's rule of phyletic size increase. Evolution 2004, 58:1608-1612.
18. Knouft J, Page D. The evolution of body size in extant groups of North American freshwater fishes: speciation, size distributions, and Cope's rule. Am. Nat. 2003, 161:413-421.
19. LaBarbera M. The evolution and ecology of body size. Patterns and Processes in the History of Life 1986, 69-98. Raup DMJablonski D. eds, Springer-Verlag, Berlin
20. Laurin M. The evolution of body size, Cope's rule and the origin of Amniotes. Syst. Biol. 2004, 53:594-622.
21. Laurin M. The splendid isolation of biological nomenclature. Zool. Scr. 2008, 37:223-233.
22. Laurin M, Canoville A, Quilhac A. Use of paleontological and molecular data i supertrees for comparative studies: the example of lissamphibian femoral microanatomy. J. Anat. 2009, 215:110-123.
23. Marjanović D, Laurin M. Fossils, molecules, divergent times, and the origin of Lissamphibians. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:369-388.
24. Mattila T, Bokma F. Extant mammal body masses suggest punctuated equilibrium. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 2008, 275:2195-2199.
25. McShea DW. Mechanisms of large-scale evolutionary trends. Evolution 1994, 48:1747-1763.
26. McShea DW. Matters of the record. Paleobiology 2000, 26:330-333.
27. Moen D. Cope's rule in cryptodiran turtles: do body sizes of extant species reflect a trend of phyletic size increase? J. Evol. Biol. 2006, 19:1210-1221.
28. Pagel M. Inferring evolutionary processes from phylogenies. Zool. Scr. 1997, 26:331-348.
29. Pagel M. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 1999, 401:877-884.
30. Pagel M. Modelling the evolution of continuously varying characters on phylogenetic trees. Morphology, Shape, and Phylogeny 2002, 269-286. MacLeod NForey PL. eds, Taylor & Francis, London/New York
31. Pianka E. Evolution of body size: varanis lizards as a model system. Am. Nat. 1995, 146:398-414.
32. Schmidt-Nielsen K. Scaling: Why is Animal Size so Important 1984, University Press, Cambridge
33. Smith FA, Lyons SK, Ernest SKM, Jones KE, Kaufman DM, Dayan T, Marquet PA, Brown JH, Haskell JP. Body mass of late quaternary mammals. Ecology 2003, 84:3402.
34. Solow AR, Wang SC. Some problems with assessing Cope's rule. Evolution 2008, 62:2092-2096.
35. Stanley S. An explanation for Cope's rule. Evolution 1973, 27:1-26.
36. Stebbins GL, Ayala FJ. Is a new evolutionary synthesis necessary? Science 1981, 213:967-971.
37. Wilson D, Reeder D. Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference 1993, Smithsonian Institutional Press, Washington