A phylogenetic comparative method for studying multivariate adaptation

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 314, Issue , 2012, Pages 204-215

  Bartoszek, Krzysztof ^a   Pienaar, Jason ^b   Mostad, Petter ^a   Andersson, Staffan ^c   Hansen, Thomas F ^d  

^a CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA   (South Africa)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Allometry; Multivariate phylogenetic comparative method; Optimality; Ornstein Uhlenbeck process

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ALLOMETRY; BODY SIZE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEER; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENETICS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ALLOMETRY; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; BODY SIZE; DEER; EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTATION; HORN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ANIMAL STRUCTURES; ANIMALS; BODY WEIGHT; DEER; FEMALE; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENY; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

CERVIDAE;

EID: 84866692796     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: 10958541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Aldous D., Popovic L. A critical branching process model for biodiversity. Adv. Appl. Prob. 2005, 37:1094-1115.
2. Aldous D.J., Krikun M.A., Popovic L. Five statistical questions about the tree of life. Syst. Biol. 2011, 60:318-328.
3. Ané C. Analysis of comparative data with hierarchical autocorrelation. Ann. Appl. Stat. 2008, 2:1078-1102.
4. Armbruster W.S. Estimating and testing the shapes of adaptive surfaces. the morphology and pollination of Dalechampia blossoms. Am. Nat. 1990, 135:14-31.
5. Armbruster W.S., Pélabon C., Hansen T.F., Bolstad G.H. Macroevolutionary patterns of pollination accuracy. a comparison of three genera. New Phytol. 2009, 183:600-617.
6. Arnold S.J., Pfrender M.E., Jones A.G. The adaptive landscape as a conceptual bridge between micro- and macroevolution. Genetica 2001, 112-113:9-32.
7. von-Bertalanffy L., Pirozynski W.J. Ontogenetic and evolutionary allometry. Evolution 1952, 6:387-392.
8. Boettiger C., Coop G., Ralph P. Is your phylogeny informative? Measuring the power of comparative methods. Evolution 2012, 66:2240-2251.
9. Butler M.A., King A.A. Phylogenetic comparative analysis. a modelling approach for adaptive evolution. Am. Nat. 2004, 164:683-695.
10. Carroll R.J., Ruppert D. Transformation and Weighting in Regression 1987, Chapman and Hall, New York.
11. Cheverud J.M. Relationships among ontogenetic, static and evolutionary allometry. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 1982, 59:129-149.
12. Cooper N., Jetz W., Freckleton R.P. Phylogenetic comparative approaches for studying niche conservativism. J. Evol. Biol. 2010, 23:2529-2539.
13. Eastman J.M., Alfaro M.E., Joyce P., Hipp A.L., Harmon L.J. A novel comparative method for identifying shifts in the rate of character evolution on trees. Evolution 2011, 65:3578-3589.
14. Felsenstein J. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 1985, 125:1-15.
15. Felsenstein J. Phylogenies and quantitative characters. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1988, 19:445-471.
16. Fernández M.H., Vrba E.S. A complete estimate of the phylogenetic relationships in Ruminantia. a dated species-level supertree of the extant ruminants. Biol. Rev. 2004, 80:269-302.
17. Fitch W.M. Toward defining the course of evolution. minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst. Zool. 1971, 20:406-416.
18. Fry J.D. The "general vigor" problem. can antagonistic pleiotropy be detected when genetic covariances are positive?. Evolution 1993, 47:327-333.
19. Gardiner C.W. Handbook of Stochastic Methods 2004, Springer, Berlin.
20. Gernhard T. The conditioned reconstructed process. J. Theor. Biol. 2008, 253:769-778.
21. Gernhard T. New analytic results for speciation times in neutral models. Bull. Math. Biol. 2008, 70:1082-1097.
22. Hadfield J.D., Nakagawa S. General quantitative genetic methods for comparative biology. phylogenies, taxonomies and multi-trait models for continuous and categorical characters. J. Evol. Biol. 2010, 23:494-508.
23. Hansen T.F. Stabilizing selection and the comparative analysis of adaptation. Evolution 1997, 51:1341-1351.
24. Hansen, T.F., 2012. Adaptive landscapes and macroevolutionary dynamics, in: Svensson, E.I., Calsbeek, R. (Eds.), The adaptive landscape in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, pp. 205-226.
25. Hansen T.F., Bartoszek K. Interpreting the evolutionary regression. the interplay between observational and biological errors in phylogenetic comparative studies. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61:413-425.
26. Hansen T.F., Martins E.P. Translating between microevolutionary process and macroevolutionary patterns. the correlation structure of interspecific data. Evolution 1996, 50:1404-1417.
27. Hansen T.F., Orzack S.H. Assessing current adaptation and phylogenetic inertia as explanations of trait evolution. the need for controlled comparisons. Evolution 2005, 59:2063-2072.
28. Hansen T.F., Pienaar J., Orzack S.H. A comparative method for studying adaptation to a randomly evolving environment. Evolution 2008, 62:1965-1977.
29. Harmon L.J., Weir J.T., Brock C.D., Glor R.E., Challenger W. GEIGER. investigating evolutionary radiations. Bioinformatics 2008, 24:129-131.
30. Hohenlohe P.A., Arnold S.A. MiPoD. a hypothesis-testing framework for microevolutionary inference from patterns of divergence. Am. Nat. 2008, 171:366-385.
31. Houle D. Genetic covariance of fitness correlates. what genetic correlations are made of and why it matters. Evolution 1991, 45:630-648.
32. Houle D. A dispatch from the multivariate frontier. J. Evol. Biol. 2007, 20:22-23.
33. Huelsenbeck J., Rannala B., Masly J. Accommodating phylogenetic uncertainty in evolutionary studies. Science 2000, 88:2349-2350.
34. Huelsenbeck J.P., Rannala B. Detecting correlation between characters in a comparative analysis with uncertain phylogeny. Evolution 2003, 57:1237-1247.
35. Huxley J.S. Problem of Relative Growth 1932, Methuen, London.
36. Jhwueng, D.C., Maroulas, V., 2011. Phylogenetic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck regression curves. ArXiv e-prints 1108.5364.
37. Kembel S.W., Cowan P.D., Helmus M.R., Cornwell W.K., Morlon H., Ackerl D.D., Blomberg S.P., Webb C.O. Picante. R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 2010, 26:1463-1464.
38. Labra A., Pienaar J., Hansen T.F. Evolution of thermal physiology in Liolaemus lizards. adaptation, phylogenetic inertia, and niche tracking. Am. Nat. 2009, 174:204-220.
39. Lajeunesse M.J. Meta-analysis and the comparative phylogenetic method. Am. Nat. 2009, 174:369-381.
40. Lande R. Natural selection and random genetic drift in phenotypic evolution. Evolution 1976, 30:314-334.
41. Lande R. Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolution, applied to brain. body size allometry. Evolution 1979, 33:402-416.
42. Lande R., Arnold S.J. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 1983, 37:1210-1226.
43. Lemey P., Rambaut A., Welch J.J., Suchard M.A. Phylogeography takes a relaxed random walk in continuous space and time. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010, 27:1877-1885.
44. Martins, E.P., 2004. COMPARE, version 4.6b. Computer programs for the statistical analysis of comparative data. Distributed by the author at 〈〉 Department of Biology Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. http://compare.bio.indiana.edu/.
45. Martins E.P., Diniz-Filho J.A.F., Housworth E.A. Adaptive constraints and the phylogenetic comparative method. a computer simulation test. Evolution 2002, 56:1-13.
46. Martins E.P., Hansen T.F. Phylogenies and the comparative method. a general approach to incorporating phylogenetic information into the analysis of interspecific data. Am. Nat. 1997, 149:646-667.
47. Moler C., Van Loan C.F. Nineteen dubious ways to compute the exponential of a matrix, twenty-five years later. SIAM Rev. 2003, 45:1-37.
48. Mooers A., Gascuel O., Stadler T., Li H., Steel M. Branch lengths on birth-death trees and the expected loss of phylogenetic diversity. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61:195-203.
49. van Noordwijk A.J., de Jong G. Acquisition and allocation of resources. their influence on variation in life history tactics. Am. Nat. 1986, 128:137-142.
50. O'Meara B.C., Ané C., Sanderson M.J., Wainwright P.C. Testing for different rates of continuous trait evolution using likelihood. Evolution 2006, 60:922-933.
51. Paradis E., Claude J., Strimmer K. Ape. analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics 2004, 20:289-290.
52. Plard F., Bonenfant C., Gaillard J.M. Revisiting the allometry of antlers among deer species. male-male sexual competition as a driver. Oikos 2011, 120:601-606.
53. Popovic L. Asymptotic genealogy of a critical branching process. Ann. Appl. Probab. 2004, 14:2120-2148.
54. R Development Core Team, 2010. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
55. Ranta E., Laurila A., Elmberg J. Reinventing the wheel. analysis of sexual dimorphism in body size. Oikos 1994, 70:313-321.
56. Reitan, T., Schweder, T., Henderiks, J. Phenotypic evolution studied by layered stochastic differential equations. Ann. Appl. Stat., in press. http://www.e-publications.org/ims/submission/index.php/AOAS/user/submissionFile/12293?confirm=a83f5019.
57. Revell L.J. Size-correction and principal components for interspecific comparative studies. Evolution 2009, 63:3258-3268.
58. Revell L.J., Collar D.C. Phylogenetic analysis of the evolutionary correlation using likelihood. Evolution 2009, 63:1090-1100.
59. Revell L.J., Harmon L.J. Testing quantitative genetic hypotheses about the evolutionary rate matrix for continuous characters. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2008, 10:311-331.
60. Roper M., Pepper R.E., Brenner M.P., Pringle A. Explosively launched spores of ascomycete fungi have drag-minimizing shapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105:20583-20588.
61. Sagitov, S., Bartoszek, K., 2012. Interspecies correlation for neutrally evolving traits. J. Theor. Biol., 309, 11-19.
62. Savageau M.A. Allometric morphogenesis of complex systems. derivation of the basic equations from first principles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1979, 76:6023-6025.
63. Simpson G.G. Tempo and Mode in Evolution 1944, Columbia University Press, New York.
64. Slater G.J., Harmon L.J., Wegmann D., Joyce P., Revell L.J., Alfaro M.E. Estimation of the branch points of a branching diffusion process. Evolution 2011, 66:752-762.
65. Stadler T., Steel M. Distribution of branch lengths and phylogenetic diversity under homogeneous speciation models. J. Theor. Biol. 2012, 297:33-40.
66. The Adaptive Landscape in Evolutionary Biology 2012, Oxford University Press. E.I. Svensson, R. Calsbeek (Eds.).
67. Thomas G.H., Freckleton R.P., Szekely T. Comparative analysis of the influence of developmental mode on phenotypic diversification rates in shorebirds. Proc. R. Soc. B 2006, 273:1619-1624.
68. Van Loan C.F. The sensitivity of the matrix exponential. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 1977, 14:971-981.
69. Van Loan C.F. Computing integrals involving the matrix exponential. IEEE T. Automat. Contr. 1978, 23:395-404.
70. Vašiček O. An equilibrium characterisation of the term structure. J. Financ. Econ. 1977, 5:177-188.
71. Voje, K.L., Hansen, T.F., 2012. Evolution of static allometries: Adaptive change in allometric slopes of eye span in stalk-eyed flies. Evolution, in press.
72. Walsh B. Escape from flatland. J. Evol. Biol. 2007, 20:36-38.
73. Walsh B., Blows M.W. Abundant genetic variation+strong selection=multivariate genetic constraints. a geometric view of adaptation. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2009, 40:41-59.