TESTING FOR PHYLOGENETIC SIGNAL IN COMPARATIVE DATA: BEHAVIORAL TRAITS ARE MORE LABILE

TESTING FOR PHYLOGENETIC SIGNAL IN COMPARATIVE DATA: BEHAVIORAL TRAITS ARE MORE LABILE Abstract The primary rationale for the use of phylogenetically based statistical methods is that phylogenetic signal, the tendency for related species to resemble each other, is ubiquitous. Whether this assertion is true for a given trait in a given lineage is an empirical question, but general tools for detecting and quantifying phylogenetic signal are inadequately developed. We present new methods for continuous‐valued characters that can be implemented with either phylogenetically independent contrasts or generalized least‐squares models. First, a simple randomization procedure allows one to test the null hypothesis of no pattern of similarity among relatives. The test demonstrates correct Type I error rate at a nominal α= 0.05 and good power (0.8) for simulated datasets with 20 or more species. Second, we derive a descriptive statistic, K, which allows valid comparisons of the amount of phylogenetic signal across traits and trees. Third, we provide two biologically motivated branch‐length transformations, one based on the Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck (OU) model of stabilizing selection, the other based on a new model in which character evolution can accelerate or decelerate (ACDC) in rate (e.g., as may occur during or after an adaptive radiation). Maximum likelihood estimation of the OU (d) and ACDC (g) parameters can serve as tests for phylogenetic signal because an estimate of d or g near zero implies that a phylogeny with little hierarchical structure (a star) offers a good fit to the data. Transformations that improve the fit of a tree to comparative data will increase power to detect phylogenetic signal and may also be preferable for further comparative analyses, such as of correlated character evolution. Application of the methods to data from the literature revealed that, for trees with 20 or more species, 92% of traits exhibited significant phylogenetic signal (randomization test), including behavioral and ecological ones that are thought to be relatively evolutionarily malleable (e.g., highly adaptive) and/or subject to relatively strong environmental (nongenetic) effects or high levels of measurement error. Irrespective of sample size, most traits (but not body size, on average) showed less signal than expected given the topology, branch lengths, and a Brownian motion model of evolution (i.e., K was less than one), which may be attributed to adaptation and/or measurement error in the broad sense (including errors in estimates of phenotypes, branch lengths, and topology). Analysis of variance of log K for all 121 traits (from 35 trees) indicated that behavioral traits exhibit lower signal than body size, morphological, life‐history, or physiological traits. In addition, physiological traits (corrected for body size) showed less signal than did body size itself. For trees with 20 or more species, the estimated OU (25% of traits) and/or ACDC (40%) transformation parameter differed significantly from both zero and unity, indicating that a hierarchical tree with less (or occasionally more) structure than the original better fit the data and so could be preferred for comparative analyses. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Evolution Wiley

TESTING FOR PHYLOGENETIC SIGNAL IN COMPARATIVE DATA: BEHAVIORAL TRAITS ARE MORE LABILE

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/testing-for-phylogenetic-signal-in-comparative-data-behavioral-traits-3rLmzCt9um
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0014-3820
eISSN
1558-5646
DOI
10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00285.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract The primary rationale for the use of phylogenetically based statistical methods is that phylogenetic signal, the tendency for related species to resemble each other, is ubiquitous. Whether this assertion is true for a given trait in a given lineage is an empirical question, but general tools for detecting and quantifying phylogenetic signal are inadequately developed. We present new methods for continuous‐valued characters that can be implemented with either phylogenetically independent contrasts or generalized least‐squares models. First, a simple randomization procedure allows one to test the null hypothesis of no pattern of similarity among relatives. The test demonstrates correct Type I error rate at a nominal α= 0.05 and good power (0.8) for simulated datasets with 20 or more species. Second, we derive a descriptive statistic, K, which allows valid comparisons of the amount of phylogenetic signal across traits and trees. Third, we provide two biologically motivated branch‐length transformations, one based on the Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck (OU) model of stabilizing selection, the other based on a new model in which character evolution can accelerate or decelerate (ACDC) in rate (e.g., as may occur during or after an adaptive radiation). Maximum likelihood estimation of the OU (d) and ACDC (g) parameters can serve as tests for phylogenetic signal because an estimate of d or g near zero implies that a phylogeny with little hierarchical structure (a star) offers a good fit to the data. Transformations that improve the fit of a tree to comparative data will increase power to detect phylogenetic signal and may also be preferable for further comparative analyses, such as of correlated character evolution. Application of the methods to data from the literature revealed that, for trees with 20 or more species, 92% of traits exhibited significant phylogenetic signal (randomization test), including behavioral and ecological ones that are thought to be relatively evolutionarily malleable (e.g., highly adaptive) and/or subject to relatively strong environmental (nongenetic) effects or high levels of measurement error. Irrespective of sample size, most traits (but not body size, on average) showed less signal than expected given the topology, branch lengths, and a Brownian motion model of evolution (i.e., K was less than one), which may be attributed to adaptation and/or measurement error in the broad sense (including errors in estimates of phenotypes, branch lengths, and topology). Analysis of variance of log K for all 121 traits (from 35 trees) indicated that behavioral traits exhibit lower signal than body size, morphological, life‐history, or physiological traits. In addition, physiological traits (corrected for body size) showed less signal than did body size itself. For trees with 20 or more species, the estimated OU (25% of traits) and/or ACDC (40%) transformation parameter differed significantly from both zero and unity, indicating that a hierarchical tree with less (or occasionally more) structure than the original better fit the data and so could be preferred for comparative analyses.

Journal

EvolutionWiley

Published: Apr 1, 2003

Keywords: ; ; ; ; ; ;

References

  • Physiological plant ecology. The 39th symposium of the British Ecological Society held at the University of York, 7–9 September 1998
    Ackerly, D. D.
  • Ontoecogenophy‐loconstraints
    Antonovics, J.; Tienderen, P. H.
  • Evolution of foraging strategies in shorebirds: an ecomorphological approach
    Barbosa, A.; Moreno, E.
  • Phylogenetic effects on morphological, life‐history, behavioural and ecological traits of birds
    Böhning‐Gaese, B.; Oberrath, R.
  • Sprint performance of phrynosomatid lizards, measured on a high‐speed treadmill, correlates with hindlimb length
    Bonine, K. E.; Garland, T.
  • Evolutionary genetics of invertebrate behavior, progress and prospects
    Bush, G. L.
  • Autoregres‐sive models for estimating phylogenetic and environmental effects: accounting for within‐species variations
    Cornillon, P.‐A.; Pontier, D.; Rochet, M.‐J.
  • The usefulness of behavior for phylogeny estimation: levels of homoplasy in behavioral and morphological characters
    Queiroz, A.; Wimberger, P. H.
  • Testing hypotheses of correlated evolution using phylogenetically independent contrasts: sensitivity to deviations from Brownian motion
    Díaz‐Uriarte, R.; Garland, T.
  • The retention index and homoplasy excess
    Farris, J. S.
  • Using the past to predict the present: confidence intervals for regression equations in phy‐logenetic comparative methods
    Garland, T.; Ives, A. R.
  • Life history variation in primates
    Harvey, P. H.; Clutton‐Brock, T. H.
  • A comparison of evolutionary radiations in mainland and Caribbean Anolis lizards
    Irschick, D. J.; Vitt, L. J.; Zani, P. A.; Losos, J. B.
  • A comparative analysis of relative brain size in waterfowl (Anseriformes)
    Iwaniuk, A. N.; Nelson, J. E.
  • Allometry of constitutive defense: a model and a comparative test with tree bark and fire regime
    Jackson, J. F.; Adams, D. C.; Jackson, U. B.
  • Null models for the number of evolutionary steps in a character on a phylogenetic tree
    Maddison, W. P.; Slatkin, M.
  • Using phy‐logenies to test macroevolutionary hypotheses of trait evolution in cranes (Gruinae)
    Mooers, A. Ø.; Vamosi, S. M.; Schluter, D.
  • Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters
    Pagel, M. D.
  • Lizard home ranges revisited: effects of sex, body size, diet, habitat, and phylogeny
    Perry, G.; Garland, T.
  • The niche of higher plants: evidence for phylogenetic conservatism
    Prinzing, A.; Durka, W.; Klotz, S.; Brandl, R.
  • Polytomies in comparative analyses of continuous characters
    Purvis, A.; Garland, T.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off