Scaling of morphological characters across trait type, sex, and environment: A meta-analysis of static allometries

American Naturalist

Volumn 187, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 89-98

  Voje, Kjetil Lysne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Allometry; Evolution; Genitals; Isometry; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; BIODIVERSITY; EVOLUTION; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; INSECT; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; META-ANALYSIS; MORPHOLOGY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPIDER; TAXONOMY;

ARANEAE; HEXAPODA;

ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; ANIMAL; BIOMETRY; BODY SIZE; FEMALE; GENITAL SYSTEM; MALE; META ANALYSIS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT;

ANIMALS; BIOMETRY; BODY SIZE; FEMALE; GENITALIA; MALE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL;

EID: 84951320719     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/684159     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Aisenberg, A., F. G. Costa, M. González, R. Postiglioni, and F. Pérez-Miles. 2010. Sexual dimorphism in chelicerae, forelegs and palpal traits in two burrowing wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae) with sex-role reversal. Journal of Natural History 44:1189-1202.
2. Bates, D., M. Maechler, B. Bolker, and S. Walker. 2014. lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package, version 1.1-7.
3. Bonduriansky, R. 2007. Sexual selection and allometry: a critical re-appraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61:838-849.
4. Bonduriansky, R., and T. Day. 2003. The evolution of static allome-try in sexually selected traits. Evolution 57:2450-2458.
5. Brown, J. H., and G. B. West. 2000. Scaling in biology. Oxford Uni-versity Press, Oxford.
6. Burkhardt, D., and I. de la Motte. 1983. How stalk-eyed flies eye stalk-eyed flies: observations and measurements of the eyes of Cyrto-diopsis whitei (Diopsidae, Diptera). Journal of Comparative Physiol-ogy 151:407-421.
7. Calder, W. A. 1984. Size, function, and life history. Harvard Univer-sity Press, Cambridge, MA.
8. Charnov, E. L. 1993. Life history invariants. Oxford University Press, New York.
9. Cheverud, J. M. 1982. Relationships among ontogenetic, static, and evolutionary allometry. American Journal of Physical Anthropol-ogy 59:139-149.
10. Eberhard, W., A. B. Huber, R. L. Rodriguez, R. D. Briceno, I. Salas, and V. Rodriguez. 1998. One size fits all? relationships between the size and degree of variation in genitalia and other body parts in twenty species of insects and spiders. Evolution 52:415-431.
11. Eberhard, W., R. L. Rodriguez, and M. Polihronakis. 2009. Pitfalls in understanding the functional significance of genital allometry. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 22:435-445.
12. Eberhard, W. G. 2002. Natural history and behavior of Chymomyza mycopelates and C. exophthalma (Diptera: Drosophilidae), and al-lometry of structures used as signals, weapons, and spore collectors. Canadian Entomologist 134:667-687.
13. Eberhard, W. G. 2009. Static allometry and animal genitalia. Evolution 63:48-66.
14. Flores, A., and M. L. Negreiros-Fransozo. 1999. Allometry of the sec-ondary sexual characters of the shore crab Pachygrapsus trans-versus (Gibbes, 1850) (Brachyura, Grapsidae). Crustaceana 72:1051-1066.
15. Fox, F. 2003. Effect displays in R for generalised linear models. Jour-nal of Statistical Software 8:1-27.
16. Fromhage, L., and H. Kokko. 2014. Sexually selected traits evolve positive allometry when some matings occur irrespective of the trait. Evolution 68:1332-1338.
17. Fuller, W. A. 1987. Measurement error models. Wiley, New York.
18. Gould, S. J. 1966. Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. Bi-ological Reviews 41:587-640.
19. Fuller, W. A. 1974. The origin and function of “bizarre” structures: antler size and skull size in the “Irish Elk,” Megaloceros giganteus. Evo-lution 28:191-220.
20. Fuller, W. A. 1977. Ontogeny and phylogeny. Belknap, Cambridge, MA.
21. Grandjean, F., D. Romain, C. Souty-Grosset, and J. P. Mocquard. 1997. Size at sexual maturity and morphometric variability in three populations of Austropotamobius pallipes pallipes (Lereboullet, 1858) according to a restocking strategy. Crustaceana 70:454-468.
22. Green, A. J. 1992. Positive allometry is likely with mate choice, com-petitive display and other functions. Animal Behaviour 43:170-172.
23. Hills, M., S. H. Graham, and B. A. Wood. 1983. The allometry of rel-ative cusp size in hominoid mandibular molars. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 62:311-316.
24. Houle, D., C. Pélabon, G. P. Wagner, and T. F. Hansen. 2011. Mea-surement and meaning in biology. Quarterly Review of Biology 86:3-34.
25. Huxley, J. S. 1924. Constant differential growth-ratios and their sig-nificance. Nature 114:895-896.
26. Huxley, J. S. 1932. Problems of relative growth. Dial, New York.
27. Johnson, N. F. 1995. Variation in male genitalia of Merope tuber New-man (Mecoptera: Meropeidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 68:224-233.
28. Kawano, K. 2004. Developmental stability and adaptive variability of male genitalia in sexually dimorphic beetles. American Naturalist 163:1-15.
29. Kleiber, M. 1947. Body size and metabolic rate. Physiological Reviews 27:511-541.
30. Kodric-Brown, A., R. M. Sibly, and J. H. Brown. 2006. The allometry of ornaments and weapons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 103:8733-8738.
31. Lande, R. 1979. Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolu-tion, applied to brain: body size allometry. Evolution 33:402-416.
32. Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210-1226.
33. Miller, E. H., and L. E. Burton. 2001. It’s all relative: allometry and var-iation in the baculum (os penis) of the harp seal, Pagophilus gro-enlandicus (Carnivora: Phocidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 72:345-355.
34. Pélabon, C., C. Firmat, G. H. Bolstad, K. L. Voje, D. Houle, J. Cassara, A. L. Rouzic, et al. 2014. Evolution ofmorphological allometry. An-nals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1320:58-75.
35. Peters, R. H. 1986. The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
36. Petrie, M. 1992. Are all secondary sexual display structures positively allometric and, if so, why? Animal Behaviour 43:173-175.
37. RDevelopment Core Team. 2015. R: a language and environment for sta-tistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
38. Reiss, M. J. 1989. The allometry of growth and reproduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
39. Sanger, T. J., E. Sherratt, J. W. McGlothlin, E. D. Brodie, J. B. Losos, and A. Abzhanov. 2013. Convergent evolution of sexual dimor-phism in skull shape using distinct developmental strategies. Evo-lution 67:2180-2193.
40. Savageau, M. A. 1979. Allometric morphogenesis of complex sys-tems: derivation of the basic equations from first principles. Pro-ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 76: 6023-6025.
41. Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 1984. Scaling: why is animal size so important. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
42. Schmitz, G., K. Reinhold, and P. Wagner. 2000. Allometric relationship between genitalic size and body size in two species of mordellid beetles (Coleoptera: Mordellidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 93:637-639.
43. Schulte-Hostedde, A. I., S. Kuula, C. Martin, C. C. M. Schank, and D. Lesbarrères. 2011. Allometry and sexually dimorphic traits in male anurans. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 24:1154-1159.
44. Shingleton, A. W., and W. A. Frankino. 2013. New perspectives on the evolution of exaggerated traits. BioEssays 35:100-107.
45. Simmons, L. W., and J. L. Tomkins. 1996. Sexual selection and the allometry of earwig forceps. Evolutionary Ecology 10:97-104.
46. Sørensen, K., W. J. Koops, and M. Grossman. 2003. Size allometry in mink (Mustela vison) selected for feed efficiency. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 53:51-57.
47. Stevens, C. F. 2009. Darwin and Huxley revisited: the origin of al-lometry. Journal of Biology 8:14.
48. Tomkins, J. L., J. S. Kotiaho, and N. R. LeBas. 2005. Matters of scale: positive allometry and the evolution of male dimorphisms. Amer-ican Naturalist 165:389-402.
49. Tomkins, J. L., N. R. LeBas, M. P. Witton, D. M. Martill, and S. Humphries. 2010. Positive allometry and the prehistory of sexual selection. American Naturalist 176:141-148.
50. Voje, K. L. 2015. Data from: Scaling of morphological characters across trait type, sex and environment: a meta-analysis of static allome-tries. American Naturalist, Dryad Digital Repository, http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.d78c5.
51. Voje, K. L., and T. F. Hansen. 2013. Evolution of static allometries: adaptive change in allometric slopes of eye span in stalk-eyed flies. Evolution 67:453-467.
52. Voje, K. L., T. F. Hansen, C. K. Egset, G. H. Bolstad, and C. Pélabon. 2014. Allometric constraints and the evolution of allometry. Evo-lution 68:866-885.
53. West, G. B., J. H. Brown, and B. J. Enquist. 1997. A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276:122-126.
54. West, G. B., J. H. Brown, and B. J. Enquist. 1999. The fourth dimension of life: fractal geometry and al-lometric scaling of organisms. Science 284:1677-1679.
55. Wilkinson, G. S., H. Kahler, and R. H. Baker. 1998. Evolution of fe-male mating preferences in stalk-eyed flies. Behavioral Ecology 9:525-533.