Parallel selective pressures drive convergent diversification of phenotypes in pythons and boas

Ecology Letters

Volumn 19, Issue 7, 2016, Pages 800-809

  Esquerré, Damien ^a   Scott Keogh, J ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Adaptive radiation; ecomorphology; henophidia; snakes

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BOIDAE; CLASSIFICATION; ECOSYSTEM; EVOLUTION; GENETIC SELECTION; HEAD; PHENOTYPE; PHYLOGENY;

ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; BOIDAE; ECOSYSTEM; HEAD; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHENOTYPE; PHYLOGENY; SELECTION, GENETIC;

HENOPHIDIA; PYTHONIDAE; SERPENTES;

EID: 84973355687     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14610248     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ele.12620     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Arbuckle, K. & Minter, A. (2015). Windex: analyzing convergent evolution using the Wheatsheaf index in R. Evol. Bioinform., 11, 11–14.
2. Arbuckle, K., Bennett, C.M. & Speed, M.P. (2014). A simple measure of the strength of convergent evolution. Methods Ecol. Evol., 5, 685–693.
3. Arendt, J. & Reznick, D. (2008). Convergence and parallelism reconsidered: what have we learned about the genetics of adaptation?. Trends Ecol. Evol., 23, 26–32.
4. Bossuyt, F. & Milinkovitch, M.C. (2000). Convergent adaptive radiations in Madagascan and Asian ranid frogs reveal covariation between larval and adult traits. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 97, 6585–6590.
5. Brakefield, P.M. (2006). Evo-devo and constraints on selection. Trends Ecol. Evol., 21, 362–368.
6. Burt, D.B. (2001). Evolutionary stasis, constraint and other terminology describing evolutionary patterns. Biol. J. Linnean Soc., 72, 509–517.
7. Donley, J.M., Sepulveda, C.A., Konstantinidis, P., Gemballa, S. & Shadwick, R.E. (2004). Convergent evolution in mechanical design of lamnid sharks and tunas. Nature, 429, 61–65.
8. Fabre, A.C., Bickford, D., Segall, M. & Herrel, A. (2016). The impact of diet, habitat use, and behaviour on head shape evolution in homalopsid snakes. Biol. J. Linnean Soc., in press.
9. Futuyma, D.J. (1998). Evolutionary Biology, 3rd edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
10. Gavrilets, S. & Losos, J.B. (2009). Adaptive radiation: contrasting theory with data. Science, 323, 732–737.
11. Grundler, M.C. & Rabosky, D.L. (2014). Trophic divergence despite morphological convergence in a continental radiation of snakes. Proc. R. Soc. B, 281, 20140413.
12. Hansen, T.F. (1997). Stabilizing selection and the comparative analysis of adaptation. Evolution, 51, 1341–1351.
13. Harmon, L.J., Kolbe, J.J., Cheverud, J.M. & Losos, J.B. (2005). Convergence and the multidimensional niche. Evolution, 59, 409–421.
14. Harvey, P.H. & Pagel, M.D. (1991). The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
15. Hsiang, A.Y., Field, D.J., Webster, T.H., Behlke, A.D., Davis, M.B., Racicot, R.A. et al. (2015). The origin of snakes: revealing the ecology, behavior, and evolutionary history of early snakes using genomics, phenomics, and the fossil record. BMC Evol. Biol., 15, 1–22.
16. Huelsenbeck, J.P., Nielsen, R. & Bollback, J.P. (2003). Stochastic mapping of morphological characters. Syst. Biol., 52, 131–158.
17. Ingram, T. & Kai, Y. (2014). The geography of morphological convergence in the radiations of pacific Sebastes rockfishes. Am. Nat., 184, E115–E131.
18. Ingram, T. & Mahler, D.L. (2013). SURFACE: detecting convergent evolution from comparative data by fitting Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models with stepwise Akaike Information Criterion. Methods Ecol. Evol., 4, 416–425.
19. Klingenberg, C.P. (2011). MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol. Ecol. Resour., 11, 353–357.
20. Klingenberg, C.P. & Gidaszewski, N.A. (2010). Testing and quantifying phylogenetic signals and homoplasy in morphometric data. Syst. Biol., 59, 245–261.
21. Klingenberg, C.P., Barluenga, M. & Meyer, A. (2002). Shape analysis of symmetric structures: quantifying variation among individuals and asymmetry. Evolution, 56, 1909–1920.
22. Losos, J.B. (2010). Adaptive radiation, ecological opportunity, and evolutionary determinism. Am. Nat., 175, 623–639.
23. Losos, J.B. (2011). Convergence, adaptation, and constraint. Evolution, 65, 1827–1840.
24. Maddison, W.P. (1991). Squared-change parsimony reconstructions of ancestral states for continuous-valued characters on a phylogenetic tree. Syst. Zool., 40, 304–314.
25. Mahler, D.L. & Ingram, T. (2014). Phylogenetic comparative methods for studying clade-wide convergence. In: Modern Phylogenetic Comparative Methods and their Application in Evolutionary Biology. (ed Garamszegi, L.Z.). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 425–450.
26. Mahler, D.L., Ingram, T., Revell, L.J. & Losos, J.B. (2013). Exceptional convergence on the macroevolutionary landscape in island lizard radiations. Science, 341, 292–295.
27. McGhee, G. (2011). Convergent Evolution: Limited Forms Most Beautiful. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
28. Melville, J., Harmon, L.J. & Losos, J.B. (2006). Intercontinental community convergence of ecology and morphology in desert lizards. Proc. R. Soc. B, 273, 557–563.
29. Moen, D.S., Morlon, H. & Wiens, J.J. (2015). Testing convergence versus history: convergence dominates phenotypic evolution for over 150 million years in frogs. Syst. Biol., 65, 146–160.
30. Muschick, M., Indermaur, A. & Salzburger, W. (2012). Convergent evolution within an adaptive radiation of cichlid fishes. Curr. Biol., 22, 2362–2368.
31. Paradis, E., Claude, J. & Strimmer, K. (2004). APE: analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics, 20, 289–290.
32. Pyron, R.A. & Burbrink, F.T. (2014). Early origin of viviparity and multiple reversions to oviparity in squamate reptiles. Ecol. Lett., 17, 13–21.
33. R Development Core Team. (2015). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [Online]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.R-project.org. Last accessed 11 November 2014.
34. Revell, L.J. (2012). Phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol. Evol., 3, 217–223.
35. Revell, L.J. (2014). Graphical methods for visualizing comparative data on phylogenies. In: Modern Phylogenetic Comparative Methods and Their Application in Evolutionary Biology. (ed Garamszegi, L.Z.). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 77–103.
36. Reynolds, G.R., Niemiller, M.L. & Revell, L.J. (2014). Toward a tree-of-life for the boas and pythons: multilocus species-level phylogeny with unprecedented taxon sampling. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 71, 201–213.
37. Rohlf, F.J. (2015). The tps series of software. Hystrix, 26, 1–4.
38. Rohlf, F.J. & Slice, D. (1990). Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst. Biol., 39, 40–59.
39. Schluter, D. (2000). The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
40. Sidlauskas, B. (2008). Continuous and arrested morphological diversification in sister clades or characiform fishes: a phylomorphospace approach. Evolution, 62, 3135–3156.
41. Simpson, G.G. (1953). The Major Features of Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York, NY.
42. Stayton, C.T. (2008). Is convergence surprising? An examination of the frequency of convergence in simulated datasets. J. Theor. Biol., 252, 1–14.
43. Stayton, C.T. (2014). Convevol: Quantifies and Assesses the Significance of Convergent Evolution. R package version 1.0. Available at: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/convevol/index.html. (Last accessed 10 October 2015)
44. Stayton, C.T. (2015). The definition, recognition, and interpretation of convergent evolution, and two new measures for quantifying and assessing the significance of convergence. Evolution, 69, 2140–2153.
45. Streicher, J.W. & Wiens, J.J. (2016). Phylogenomic analyses reveal novel relationships among snake families. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.. 100, 160–169
46. Uyeda, J.C., Caetano, D.S. & Pennell, M.W. (2015). Comparative analysis of principal components can be misleading. Syst. Biol., 64, 677–689.
47. Wainwright, P.C., Alfaro, M.E., Bolnick, D.I. & Hulsey, C.D. (2005). Many-to-one mapping of form to function: a general principle in organismal design? Integr. Comp. Biol., 45, 256–262.
48. Wake, D.B. (1991). Homoplasy: the result of natural selection, or evidence of design limitations? Am. Nat., 138, 543–567.
49. Zelditch, M.L., Swiderski, D.L. & Sheets, H.D. (2012). Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists: A Primer, 2nd edn. Academic Press, London, UK.
50. Zheng, Y. & Wiens, J.J. (2016). Combining phylogenomic and supermatrix approaches, and a time-calibrated phylogeny for squamate reptiles (lizards and snakes) based on 52 genes and 4162 species. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 94, 537–547.