| Literature DB >> 24130664 |
Dennis Rödder1, A Michelle Lawing, Morris Flecks, Faraham Ahmadzadeh, Johannes Dambach, Jan O Engler, Jan Christian Habel, Timo Hartmann, David Hörnes, Flora Ihlow, Kathrin Schidelko, Darius Stiels, P David Polly.
Abstract
The climatic cycles of the Quaternary, during which global mean annual temperatures have regularly changed by 5-10°C, provide a special opportunity for studying the rate, magnitude, and effects of geographic responses to changing climates. During the Quaternary, high- and mid-latitude species were extirpated from regions that were covered by ice or otherwise became unsuitable, persisting in refugial retreats where the environment was compatible with their tolerances. In this study we combine modern geographic range data, phylogeny, Pleistocene paleoclimatic models, and isotopic records of changes in global mean annual temperature, to produce a temporally continuous model of geographic changes in potential habitat for 59 species of North American turtles over the past 320 Ka (three full glacial-interglacial cycles). These paleophylogeographic models indicate the areas where past climates were compatible with the modern ranges of the species and serve as hypotheses for how their geographic ranges would have changed in response to Quaternary climate cycles. We test these hypotheses against physiological, genetic, taxonomic and fossil evidence, and we then use them to measure the effects of Quaternary climate cycles on species distributions. Patterns of range expansion, contraction, and fragmentation in the models are strongly congruent with (i) phylogeographic differentiation; (ii) morphological variation; (iii) physiological tolerances; and (iv) intraspecific genetic variability. Modern species with significant interspecific differentiation have geographic ranges that strongly fluctuated and repeatedly fragmented throughout the Quaternary. Modern species with low genetic diversity have geographic distributions that were highly variable and at times exceedingly small in the past. Our results reveal the potential for paleophylogeographic models to (i) reconstruct past geographic range modifications, (ii) identify geographic processes that result in genetic bottlenecks; and (iii) predict threats due to anthropogenic climate change in the future.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24130664 PMCID: PMC3794015 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072855
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Relationships between fundamental niches, realized niches, potential niches and geographic distributions as (a) a Venn diagram (after [36], [157]); (b) in climatic niche space (E-space); and (c) in geographic space (G-space).
A species' realized niche (R) is the intersection of its fundamental niche (F), its accessible climate or territory (A), and the climate and territory not barred by biotic interactions (B). Its potential niche (P) is the subset of the fundamental niche for which there is available climate (A), and its potential distribution is the territory with climate tolerable to the species. (F ∩ P) is the range of climate or geography that is climatically tolerable to a species but which is not accessible because of the lack of climate availability (E-space) or geographic barriers (G-space). A fossil may occur in E-space within the species' potential distribution (1), outside the range of available paleoclimate (2), or in paleoclimates which are available but actually not suitable (3). See text for details.
Comprehensive overview of phylogeographic and morphometric analyses of North American turtle species.
| Species | Marker | Diversity/bottleneck | differentiation | Time | Reference |
|
| mt/nuclear DNA sequences | Low diversity caused by geographically restricted refugia (x) | Four well supported clades: large Northern clade composed of populations from Washington south to San Luis Obispo County, California, west of the Coast Ranges; a San Joaquin Valley clade from the southern Great Central Valley; a geographically restricted Santa Barbara clade from a limited region in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties; and a Southern clade that occurs south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the Transverse Range south to Baja California, Mexico. (1) | old |
|
|
| mtDNA | Genetic bottlenecks caused due to dispersal into postglacial and glacial habitats (1) | Historical vicariant processes during the Pliocene, genetic break between northern–western and south-eastern populations into seven lineages. (1) | old |
|
|
| mtDNA | NA | Strong intraspecific vicariance, split into five clades and two main groups west versus east; | old |
|
|
| mtDNA | NA | Strong intraspecific vicariance, split into seven clades and two main groups (west versus east). (1) | old | |
| Mt/ncDNA: CytB, R35, RAG-1, Cmos | High genetic variability, no genetic bottlenecks (1) | Six lineages e.g. subspecies: south/eastern/northern: | old |
| |
|
| mtDNA, allozymes | Low variation, even in allozymes (x) | mtDNA support the species-level distinctness of | old |
|
| mtDNA: control region | Low mtDNA variation, unusual for a widely distributed species (x) | No genetic structure (x) | old |
| |
|
| mtDNA control region | Low mtDNA variation (0.15–0.45%) (1) | Lowest mtDNA variation compared with the | old |
|
|
| mtDNA control region | mtDNA variation | Two distinct main groups (three lineages, | old |
|
|
| Morphology | Three morphologically distinct subspecies, |
| ||
|
| 5 μSats | Low diversity (1) | Three distinct groups: (pairwise FSTs = 0.042–0.124; p<0.05) (1) | old |
|
| 5 μSats | Low diversity (1) | Appalachian Mountains and the Hudson River appear to present major barriers to gene flow; Appalachian Mountains as well as the highly disjunct Nova Scotia populations of Blanding's turtle are recognized as evolutionarily significant units. (1) | old to recent |
| |
|
| mtDNA control region | 21 haplotypes, low diversity, bottleneck during the Pleistocene (1) | Little genetic differentiation (highest pairwise difference was 2%), one main postglacial dispersal route was inferred along the east coast, with subsequent westwards dispersal and one common southern refugium. (1) | old |
|
|
| mtDNA; cytb, nd4, and d-loop | Bottleneck in refugia and subsequent rapid post-Pleistocene expansion into the north (1) | Low level of divergence. (1) | old |
|
|
| Morphometric, Nuclear and mtDNA (mtDNA, control region, ND4) | NA | Shallow genetic and morphologic differentiation between the Pearl and Pascagoula river samples of | recent |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Two subspecies, | old |
|
|
| mtDNA | Low haplotype variation (1) | Two main clades dividing the species into two subspecies: | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Two subspecies, | old |
|
|
| mtDNA; control region | High haplotype diversity due to relatively stable refugium (1) |
| old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Six subspecies, |
| |
|
| mtDNA; control region | Very high genetic diversity (due to large and relatively stable refugia) (1) | Four major lineages with two main splits (west versus east): Western group (Missouri, Louisiana), Central Group (Gulf coastal states), eastern group (Atlantic coastal states) southern group (Florida); | old |
|
|
| mtDNA; μSats | Range-wide consistently low within-population mtDNA and microsatellite diversity (1) | Strong differentiation: Six evolutionarily significant units are recommended on the basis of reciprocal mtDNA monophyly and high levels of microsatellite DNA divergence, Suwannee River population might eventually be recognized as a distinct taxonomic unit. (1) | old |
|
| mtDNA control region | Low intraspecific diversity, major proportion of genetic diversity is restricted to lineages (caused by distinct and small refugia) (1) | Strong differentiation into three groups (eastern, central and western portion of the species' range) coinciding with three recognized biogeographic provinces. (1) |
| ||
|
| mtDNA; cytochrome | mtDNA genotypic diversity (G = 0.582) very low despite large and relatively stable refugia (NA due to anthropogenic translocation) | Exceptionally low genotypic diversity and divergence levels. (NA due to anthropogenic translocation) | old |
|
| Mark-Release-Recapture, 6 μSats | NA | Low genetic differentiation, with isolation by distance, probably a pattern caused by translocations; (NA due to anthropogenic translocation) | recent |
| |
|
| Morphology | NA | Two to three morphologically distinct subspecies, |
| |
|
| mtDNA ND4, 5 μSats | ? (small but stable refugium, not distinguishable) | Relatively homogeneous genetic structure throughout its range; (1) | old and recent |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Four distinct subspecies, | old |
|
|
| mtDNA | Considerably lower genetic variability within the north-western clade (due to strong refugia retraction-expansion) (1) | Strong genetic split into west versus east lineage. (1) | old |
|
|
| mtDNA | NA | Strong genetic split between west and east. (1) | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Significant morphologic splits between six subspecies: a western subspecies | old |
|
| mtDNA, d-loop; 9 μSats | No population structure in | Analyses comprised four of six extant subspecies of | old |
| |
|
| Mark-Release-Recapture; 9 μSats | NA | Isolation by distance across the geographical range suggests that dispersal limitation exists at the regional scale. (NA) | recent |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Significant morphologic split between a southern group (here | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Two subspecies, | old |
|
| 16 μSats | NA | Bottlenecked population show no loss of genetic information, Ne = 300, census pop size 700. (NA) | recent |
| |
|
| Morphology | NA | Significant morphologic split between a western subspecies ( | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Significant morphologic split between a northern group ( | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Significant split between the Baja California populations ( | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Significant morphologic split between an eastern subspecies | old |
|
|
| Morphology | NA | Genetic subdivision into five subspecies, while one is restricted to a very small geographical area (thus not compared with modeling results). Subspecies restrictions coincide with climate niche restriction over time in |
|
Given are details on intraspecific variability and differentiation, the marker system, the dating of splits (old = before the LGM, recent = after the LGM) as well as a comparison with the results obtained from paleophylogeographic modeling (1 = pattern mirrored in PPGM; x = pattern not mirrored).
Figure 3Relationships between pairwise changes in mean annual temperatures (MAT) and pairwise changes in potential distribution range sizes as well as between MAT and pairwise changes in geographic centers of potential distributions in 59 Nearctic chelonians during the last 320 ky.
Warmer colors reflect higher point densities considering both climate and phylogenetic effects (top panel), only climate (middle panel) and only phylogeny (bottom).
Figure 4Historic niche dynamics in Nearctic chelonians based on 141 fossils and the five most proximal (SIM5) 50 km2 points in climate space in those cases where species find no analogous climates to their past potential niche.
Positive MESS scores indicate conditions within the species' modern potential niche and negative MESS scores indicate bioclimatic conditions outside of the modern potential niche. Solid lines refer to the complete set of fossils (black) and SIM5 points (gray), wherein dotted lines refer to subsets nested across all variables within the species' potential niche. Percentages provided in each subplot refer to the proportion of records within the species' current realizable niche and the respective subsets (total/within potential niche/outside of potential niche) for fossils (F) and SIM5 (S). Dashed lines refer to subsets of exeeding those conditions currently available to the species in at least one predictor. Abbreviations are: BIO1 = annual mean temperature; BIO2 = mean diurnal range; BIO3 = isothermality; BIO4 = temperature seasonality; BIO5 = max temperature of warmest month; BIO6 = min temperature of coldest month; BIO7 = temperature annual range; BIO8 = mean temperature of wettest quarter; BIO9 = mean temperature of driest quarter; BIO10 = mean temperature of warmest quarter; BIO11 = mean temperature of coldest quarter; BIO12 = annual precipitation; BIO13 = precipitation of wettest month; BIO14 = precipitation of driest month; BIO15 = precipitation seasonality; BIO16 = precipitation of wettest quarter; BIO17 = precipitation of driest quarter; BIO18 = precipitation of warmest quarter; BIO19 = precipitation of coldest quarter; MESS: Multivariate Environmental Similarity Score.
Figure 2Predicted current species richness according to 100% and 90% environmental envelopes (A) as well as historic fluctuations as projected for the last glacial maximum 21 ky BP (B) and the last interglacial (C) according to palaeophylogeographic models of 59 Nearctic chelonians.
Dispersal capacities per species were restricted to the corresponding watersheds (D). For full videos see Appendix S4 in Material S1.
Summary statistics for fossil occurrences in Nearctic chelonians in terms of availability and niche position relative to the species' modern niches (for more details see Appendix S3 in Material S1).
| Species | N fossils | within realized niche [%] | within potential niche [%] |
|
| 4 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 2 | 0.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 6 | 16.7 | 66.7 |
|
| 22 | 63.6 | 77.3 |
|
| 14 | 42.9 | 92.9 |
|
| 1 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 4 | 25.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 7 | 42.9 | 85.7 |
|
| 3 | 66.7 | 100.0 |
|
| 1 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 5 | 20.0 | 80.0 |
|
| 3 | 33.3 | 100.0 |
|
| 3 | 33.3 | 100.0 |
|
| 1 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 4 | 50.0 | 75.0 |
|
| 41 | 56.1 | 87.8 |
|
| 5 | 60.0 | 100.0 |
|
| 15 | 26.7 | 80.0 |
| Total | 141 | 48.9 | 86.5 |
Multivariate environmental similarity scores (MESS) for fossils that fell outside the potential distribution of their species. Negative scores indicate the distance outside the potential niche as a percentage of the niche's size.
| Subsets | Variable | N | Mean MESS | Max MESS |
| Total | BIO10 | 48 | −79.6 | −218.0 |
| BIO2 | 7 | −26.4 | −61.6 | |
| BIO5 | 5 | −45.7 | −85.4 | |
| BIO8 | 4 | −206.0 | −814.3 | |
| BIO4 | 3 | −27.2 | −58.7 | |
| BIO6 | 1 | −1.6 | −1.6 | |
| BIO17 | 1 | −7.9 | −7.9 | |
| BIO13 | 1 | −25.3 | −25.3 | |
| BIO12 | 1 | −7.5 | −7.5 | |
| BIO19 | 1 | −16.4 | −16.4 | |
| outside modern potential niche | ||||
| BIO10 | 18 | −125.5 | −218.0 | |
| BIO5 | 1 | −24.0 | −24.0 | |
| within modern potential niche | ||||
| BIO10 | 30 | −52.1 | −149.2 | |
| BIO2 | 7 | −26.4 | −61.6 | |
| BIO5 | 4 | −51.1 | −85.4 | |
| BIO8 | 4 | −206.0 | −814.3 | |
| BIO4 | 3 | −27.2 | −58.7 | |
| BIO6 | 1 | −1.6 | −1.6 | |
| BIO17 | 1 | −7.9 | −7.9 | |
| BIO13 | 1 | −25.3 | −25.3 | |
| BIO12 | 1 | −7.5 | −7.5 | |
| BIO19 | 1 | −16.4 | −16.4 | |
For example, a MESS score of −1.6 on BIO6 indicates that the fossil fell 1.6% outside the niche's breadth on the BIO6 climate variable (c.f., Figure 1). Only incompatible climate variables are reported here (see Appendix S3 in Material S1 for a full summary).