PHYLOGENETIC AUTOCORRELATION UNDER DISTINCT EVOLUTIONARY PROCESSES

Abstract.— I show how phylogenetic correlograms track distinct microevolutionary processes and can be used as empirical descriptors of the relationship between interspecific covariance (VB) and time since divergence (t). Data were simulated under models of gradual and speciational change, using increasing levels of stabilizing selection in a stochastic Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck (O‐U) process, on a phylogeny of 42 species. For each simulated dataset, correlograms were constructed using Moran's I coefficients estimated at five time slices, established at constant intervals. The correlograms generated under different evolutionary models differ significantly according to F‐values derived from analysis of variance comparing Moran's I at each time slice and based on Wilks’λ from multivariate analysis of variance comparing their overall profiles in a two‐way design. Under Brownian motion or with small restraining forces in the O‐U process, correlograms were better fit by a linear model. However, increasing restraining forces in the O‐U process cause a lack of linear fit, and correlograms are better described by exponential models. These patterns are better fit for gradual than for speciational modes of change. Correlograms can be used as a diagnostic method and to describe the VB/t relationship before using methods to analyze correlated evolution that assume (or perform statistically better when) this relationship is linear.

[1]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  Size, Life-History Traits, and Social Organization in the Canidae: A Reevaluation , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[2]  E. Abouheif A method for testing the assumption of phylogenetic independence in comparative data , 1999 .

[3]  B. Manly Multivariate Statistical Methods : A Primer , 1986 .

[4]  Theodore Garland,et al.  Phylogenetic Analysis of Covariance by Computer Simulation , 1993 .

[5]  T. Garland,et al.  Effects of branch length errors on the performance of phylogenetically independent contrasts. , 1998, Systematic biology.

[6]  J. Cheverud,et al.  THE QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF PHYLOGENETIC CONSTRAINTS IN COMPARATIVE ANALYSES: SEXUAL DIMORPHISM IN BODY WEIGHT AMONG PRIMATES , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[7]  Mark Kot,et al.  Adaptation: Statistics and a Null Model for Estimating Phylogenetic Effects , 1990 .

[8]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  ARE PINNIPEDS FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT FROM FISSIPED CARNIVORES? THE IMPORTANCE OF PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE ANALYSES , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[9]  Emília P. Martins,et al.  Estimating the Rate of Phenotypic Evolution from Comparative Data , 1994, The American Naturalist.

[10]  M. Pagel Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution , 1999, Nature.

[11]  D. Schluter,et al.  Fitting macroevolutionary models to phylogenies: an example using vertebrate body sizes , 1998 .

[12]  R. Sokal,et al.  TESTING INFERENCES ABOUT MICRO‐EVOLUTIONARY PROCESSES BY MEANS OF SPATIAL AUTOCORRELATION ANALYSIS , 1991, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[13]  J. Diniz‐Filho,et al.  AN EIGENVECTOR METHOD FOR ESTIMATING PHYLOGENETIC INERTIA , 1998, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[14]  T. Garland,et al.  PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSES OF THE CORRELATED EVOLUTION OF CONTINUOUS CHARACTERS: A SIMULATION STUDY , 1991, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[15]  T. Garland,et al.  Procedures for the Analysis of Comparative Data Using Phylogenetically Independent Contrasts , 1992 .

[16]  George V. Lauder,et al.  What does the Comparative Method Reveal About Adaptation? , 1994, The American Naturalist.

[17]  R. Sokal,et al.  A simulation study of microevolutionary inferences by spatial autocorrelation analysis , 1997 .

[18]  Martins,et al.  Adaptation and the comparative method. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[19]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  Building large trees by combining phylogenetic information: a complete phylogeny of the extant Carnivora (Mammalia) , 1999, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[20]  T. F. Hansen STABILIZING SELECTION AND THE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ADAPTATION , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[21]  E. Martins,et al.  PHYLOGENIES, SPATIAL AUTOREGRESSION, AND THE COMPARATIVE METHOD: A COMPUTER SIMULATION TEST , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[22]  E. Martins,et al.  Phylogenies and comparative data, a microevolutionary perspective. , 1995, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[23]  Arthur E. Dunham,et al.  Historical perspectives in ecology and evolutionary biology: the use of phylogenetic comparative analyses , 1993 .

[24]  ARE PINNIPEDS FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT FROM FISSIPED CARNIVORES? THE IMPORTANCE OF PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE ANALYSES , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[25]  M. Kot,et al.  COMPARATIVE METHODS AT THE SPECIES LEVEL: GEOGRAPHIC VARIATION IN MORPHOLOGY AND GROUP SIZE IN GREY‐CROWNED BABBLERS (POMATOSTOMUS TEMPORALIS) , 1995, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[26]  Ramón Díaz-Uriarte,et al.  TESTING HYPOTHESES OF CORRELATED EVOLUTION USING PHYLOGENETICALLY INDEPENDENT CONTRASTS: SENSITIVITY TO DEVIATIONS FROM BROWNIAN MOTION , 1996 .

[27]  Comparative Analysis of Character Displacement and Spatial Adaptations as Illustrated by the Evolution of Dalechampia Blossoms , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[28]  Anthony R. Ives,et al.  Using the Past to Predict the Present: Confidence Intervals for Regression Equations in Phylogenetic Comparative Methods , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[29]  Richard A. Johnson,et al.  Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis , 1983 .

[30]  P. Taylor,et al.  Von Bertalanffy's Growth Equation Should Not Be Used to Model Age and Size at Maturity , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[31]  T. Garland,et al.  Polytomies and phylogenetically independent contrasts: examination of the bounded degrees of freedom approach. , 1999, Systematic biology.

[32]  T. Tregenza,et al.  Phylogenies and the Comparative Method in Animal Behaviour , 1997 .

[33]  D. Schluter,et al.  Using Phylogenies to Test Macroevolutionary Hypotheses of Trait Evolution in Cranes (Gruinae) , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[34]  E. Martins The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology, Paul H. Harvey, Mark D. Pagel. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1991), vii, + 239 Price $24.95 paperback , 1992 .

[35]  Robert R. Sokal,et al.  Spatial autocorrelation in biology: 2. Some biological implications and four applications of evolutionary and ecological interest , 1978 .

[36]  J. Felsenstein Phylogenies and quantitative characters , 1988 .

[37]  E. Morales ESTIMATING PHYLOGENETIC INERTIA IN TITHONIA (ASTERACEAE): A COMPARATIVE APPROACH , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[38]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  ACCURACY OF ESTIMATED PHYLOGENIES: EFFECTS OF TREE TOPOLOGY AND EVOLUTIONARY MODEL , 1990, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[39]  J. Losos Uncertainty in the reconstruction of ancestral character states and limitations on the use of phylogenetic comparative methods , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[40]  T. F. Hansen,et al.  TRANSLATING BETWEEN MICROEVOLUTIONARY PROCESS AND MACROEVOLUTIONARY PATTERNS: THE CORRELATION STRUCTURE OF INTERSPECIFIC DATA , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[41]  P. Legendre,et al.  MODELING BRAIN EVOLUTION FROM BEHAVIOR: A PERMUTATIONAL REGRESSION APPROACH , 1994, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[42]  R. Sokal,et al.  Spatial autocorrelation in biology: 1. Methodology , 1978 .