Suppr超能文献

形态变异的系统发育和环境组成部分:旱獭(啮齿目,旱獭属)的头骨、下颌骨和臼齿形状

Phylogenetic and environmental components of morphological variation: skull, mandible, and molar shape in marmots (Marmota, Rodentia).

作者信息

Caumul Radhekshmi, Polly P David

机构信息

School of Biological Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Evolution. 2005 Nov;59(11):2460-72.

Abstract

The phenotype is a product of its phylogenetic history and its recent adaptation to local environments, but the relative importance of the two factors is controversial. We assessed the effects of diet, habitat, elevation, temperature, precipitation, body size, and mtDNA genetic divergence on shape variation in skulls, mandibles, and molars, structures that differ in their genetic and functional control. We asked whether these structures have adapted to environment to the same extent and whether they retain the same amount of phylogenetic signal. We studied these traits in intra- and interspecific populations of Eurasian marmots whose last common ancestor lived 2-5 million years ago. Path Analysis revealed that body size explained 10% of variation in skulls, 7% in mandibles, and 15% in molars. Local vegetation explained 7% of variation in skulls, 11% in mandibles, and 12% in molars. Dietary category explained 25% of variation in skulls, 11% in mandibles, and 9% in molars. Cyt b mtDNA divergence (phylogeny) explained 15% of variation in skulls, 7% in mandibles, and 5% in molars. Despite the percentages of phylogenetic variance, maximum-likelihood trees based on molar and skull shape recovered most phylogenetic groupings correctly, but mandible shape did not. The good performance of molars and skulls was probably due to different factors. Skulls are genetically and functionally more complicated than teeth, and they had more mathematically independent components of variation (5-6-in skulls compared to 3-in molars). The high proportion of diet-related variance was not enough to mask the phylogenetic signal. Molars had fewer independent components, but they also have less ecophenotypic variation and evolve more slowly, giving each component a proportionally stronger phylogenetic signal. Molars require larger samples for each operational taxonomic unit than the other structures because the proportion of within-taxon to between-taxon variation was higher. Good phylogenetic signal in quantitative skeletal morphology is likely to be found only when the taxa have a common ancestry no older than hundreds of thousands or millions of years (1% to 10% mtDNA divergence)--under these conditions skulls and molars provide stronger signal than mandibles.

摘要

表型是其系统发育史及其近期对当地环境适应的产物,但这两个因素的相对重要性存在争议。我们评估了饮食、栖息地、海拔、温度、降水、体型以及线粒体DNA遗传差异对颅骨、下颌骨和臼齿形状变异的影响,这些结构在遗传和功能控制方面存在差异。我们询问这些结构是否在相同程度上适应了环境,以及它们是否保留了相同数量的系统发育信号。我们在欧亚旱獭的种内和种间种群中研究了这些特征,其最后的共同祖先生活在200万至500万年前。通径分析表明,体型解释了颅骨变异的10%、下颌骨变异的7%和臼齿变异的15%。当地植被解释了颅骨变异的7%、下颌骨变异的11%和臼齿变异的12%。饮食类别解释了颅骨变异的25%、下颌骨变异的11%和臼齿变异的9%。细胞色素b线粒体DNA差异(系统发育)解释了颅骨变异的15%、下颌骨变异的7%和臼齿变异的5%。尽管系统发育方差的百分比不同,但基于臼齿和颅骨形状的最大似然树正确地恢复了大多数系统发育分组,而下颌骨形状则没有。臼齿和颅骨的良好表现可能是由于不同的因素。颅骨在遗传和功能上比牙齿更复杂,并且它们具有更多数学上独立的变异成分(颅骨有5 - 6个,而臼齿有3个)。与饮食相关的方差比例很高,但不足以掩盖系统发育信号。臼齿的独立成分较少,但它们的生态表型变异也较少,进化较慢,这使得每个成分具有比例上更强的系统发育信号。对于每个操作分类单元,臼齿比其他结构需要更大的样本量,因为类群内变异与类群间变异的比例更高。只有当分类单元的共同祖先不超过几十万或几百万年(线粒体DNA差异为1%至10%)时,才可能在定量骨骼形态学中发现良好的系统发育信号——在这些条件下,颅骨和臼齿提供的信号比下颌骨更强。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验