| Literature DB >> 27507121 |
P Raia1, F Carotenuto1, A Mondanaro1, S Castiglione1, F Passaro1, F Saggese1, M Melchionna1, C Serio1, L Alessio1, D Silvestro2, M Fortelius3,4.
Abstract
Animal clades tend to follow a predictable path of waxing and waning during their existence, regardless of their total species richness or geographic coverage. Clades begin small and undifferentiated, then expand to a peak in diversity and range, only to shift into a rarely broken decline towards extinction. While this trajectory is now well documented and broadly recognised, the reasons underlying it remain obscure. In particular, it is unknown why clade extinction is universal and occurs with such surprising regularity. Current explanations for paleontological extinctions call on the growing costs of biological interactions, geological accidents, evolutionary traps, and mass extinctions. While these are effective causes of extinction, they mainly apply to species, not clades. Although mass extinctions is the undeniable cause for the demise of a sizeable number of major taxa, we show here that clades escaping them go extinct because of the widespread tendency of evolution to produce increasingly specialised, sympatric, and geographically restricted species over time.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27507121 PMCID: PMC4978992 DOI: 10.1038/srep30965
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The weak directionality theory of clade geographic evolution.
(A) The total (green solid line), average (blue solid line), and clade (gold solid line) range size curves for the focal clade. The total range curve is computed as the algebraic sum of individual species range sizes over time. The average range curve is computed dividing the total curve for the number of species present in each time bin. The clade range curve represents the range actually occupied by the entire clade, summed over consecutive time bins. According to weak directionality theory predictions, after the shift point (vertical light blue line) the total- and the clade range curves should diverge signficantly over time, as an effect of a progressive increased range overlap (sympatry). The area test (B) is devised to test such prediction. As species range sizes are expected to decrease, on average, after the shift points, the average range curve should take a negative slope after the shift (C). The slope test is devised to test such prediction.
Figure 2Difference between total and clade range curves computation.
The total geographic range is computed by summing the range of each species in each time interval and then over successive intervals. The actual range is the real range of the clade, thus it is computed as the union of species’ areas, subsequently summed over consecutive time bins. In the figure, the shaded areas represent the species ranges. Species are indicated by capital letters. For each time bin, extinct species are indicated in grey color, living species are reported in black. Upper row: computation of the total range curve. Lower row: computation of the clade range curve.
Likelihoods obtained by comparing total range size cumulative curves to three different theoretical curves corresponding to the linear, sigmoid, and generalized logistic models.
| Clade | linear | sigmoid | generalized logistic | best model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Desmoceratidae | 2.337 | 7.935 | 8.082 | generalized logistic |
| Auloporida | 2.422 | 7.695 | 7.240 | sigmoid |
| Cystiphyllida | 2.296 | 7.724 | 7.121 | sigmoid |
| Favositida | 2.577 | 9.402 | 8.504 | sigmoid |
| Stauriida | 2.799 | 9.899 | 9.477 | generalized logistic |
| Pterineidae | 2.321 | 6.510 | 7.065 | sigmoid |
| Athyridida | 2.697 | 8.800 | 9.365 | generalized logistic |
| Orthida | 2.675 | 8.743 | 9.327 | generalized logistic |
| Orthotetida | 2.579 | 9.356 | 8.954 | sigmoid |
| Productida | 2.586 | 8.839 | 9.360 | generalized logistic |
| Spiriferida | 2.581 | 8.996 | 9.512 | generalized logistic |
| Spiriferinida | 2.655 | 9.684 | 9.087 | sigmoid |
| Strophomenida | 2.397 | 9.263 | 8.444 | sigmoid |
| Cystoporida | 2.393 | 8.439 | 7.355 | sigmoid |
| Fenestrida | 2.347 | 8.396 | 7.607 | sigmoid |
| Rhabdomesida | 2.325 | 5.947 | 6.731 | sigmoid |
| Trepostomida | 2.446 | 8.260 | 8.032 | sigmoid |
| Bellerophontidae | 2.272 | 8.186 | 7.975 | sigmoid |
| Euomphalidae | 2.252 | 6.749 | 7.569 | sigmoid |
| Lophospiridae | 2.328 | 8.773 | 7.845 | generalized logistic |
| Proetidae | 2.289 | 7.344 | 8.113 | sigmoid |
Comparisons were made by means of maximum likelihood estimation. Log-likelihoods are reported. The last column indicates the best fitting model based on AICc.
Average age of the shiftpoints (in Ma) and the percentage of time since clade inception to the shiftpoints.
| Major Clade | clade | shiftpoints | p.dist | area.test | net.t | slope | p.slope |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ammonites | Desmoceratidae | 101.7 (56.8%) | −10941.1 | 0.659 | |||
| Anthozoans | Auloporida | 393.9 (28.5%) | 136.64 | −1486.7 | 0.059 | ||
| Anthozoans | Auloporida | 288.3 (85.6%) | 504.43 | 9156.0 | 0.151 | ||
| Anthozoans | Cystiphyllida | 393.1 (84.5%) | 0.184 | 164389.6 | NA | ||
| Anthozoans | Favositida | 415.5 (17.8%) | −9464.8 | ||||
| Anthozoans | Favositida | 383.1 (34.2%) | −1562.2 | ||||
| Anthozoans | Stauriida | 358.8 (47.7%) | 1.000 | −2772.6 | |||
| Anthozoans | Stauriida | 361.2 (46.5%) | 0.199 | −2772.6 | |||
| Anthozoans | Stauriida | 372.9 (40.7%) | 1.000 | −2810.6 | |||
| Bivalves | Pterineidae | 400.5 (27.2%) | −4884.8 | ||||
| Brachiopods | Athyridida | 306.4 (55.3%) | 0.870 | −2118.5 | |||
| Brachiopods | Athyridida | 284.9 (63.3%) | 0.298 | −810.1 | 0.325 | ||
| Brachiopods | Orthida | 372.8 (50.2%) | 0.780 | −1040.8 | |||
| Brachiopods | Orthida | 360.2 (55.4%) | 0.512 | −916.3 | |||
| Brachiopods | Orthotetida | 404.7 (24.9%) | 1 | −951.8 | 0.251 | ||
| Brachiopods | Orthotetida | 347.4 (53.2%) | 0.974 | 886.4 | 0.601 | ||
| Brachiopods | Orthotetida | 294.7 (79.2%) | 8810.1 | 0.211 | |||
| Brachiopods | Productida | 276.9 (87.1%) | 18956.9 | 0.144 | |||
| Brachiopods | Spiriferida | 316.9 (64.6%) | 1.000 | 453.7 | 0.732 | ||
| Brachiopods | Spiriferinida | 258.3 (38.0%) | 219.1 | 0.335 | |||
| Brachiopods | Strophomenida | 406.7 (43.0%) | −6006.0 | 0.068 | |||
| Bryozoans | Cystoporida | 276.5 (86.5%) | 48723.2 | 0.093 | |||
| Bryozoans | Fenestrida | 292 (78.3%) | −4184.0 | 0.612 | |||
| Bryozoans | Rhabdomesida | 294 (79.8%) | −10506.9 | ||||
| Bryozoans | Trepostomida | 399.4 (19.9%) | 1655.2 | 0.003 | |||
| Bryozoans | Trepostomida | 274.2 (59.8%) | 2291.5 | 0.023 | |||
| Gastropods | Bellerophontidae | 324.2 (66.0%) | 4228.9 | 0.046 | |||
| Gastropods | Euomphalidae | 356.7 (48.8%) | −5382.5 | ||||
| Gastropods | Lophospiridae | 294.3 (62.4%) | −4851.4 | ||||
| Trilobites | Proetidae | 375.2 (58.0%) | −22289.3 | 0.148 |
The probability that the distance among shift points is lower than expected by chance (p.dist). The ratio of the percentage of area per unit time between the total range and the clade range curves after the average shiftpoint as compared to the same figure before the shiftpoint (see Fig. 1 for further explanation)(area.test). The probability that net diversification rates decrease after the shiftpoint (net.t). The slope of the regression between the average species range and time after the shiftpoint (slope) and the probability that such a regression slope is different from zero (p.slope). Values in bold indicate compliance to weak directionality theory.
The distribution of positive cases (i.e. either in accordance or not with the hypotheses tested) for the clade statistics reported in Table 2.
| p.dist | area.test | net.t | slope.test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| % significant shifts | 66.67 | 93.33 | 93.33 | 80 |
| p.value (binomial test) | 0.0280 | ≪0.0001 | ≪0.0001 | 0.0351 |
| % significant clades | 76.19 | 95.24 | 1 | 66.67 |
| p.value (binomial test) | 0.0279 | ≪0.0001 | ≪0.0001 | 0.1890 |
The statistical comparison is made according to the binomial distribution, given a priori success ratio of 0.5. Binomial tests are computed for both individual shiftpoints, and for clades. For the latter each hypothesis is assumed to be verified if at least one shiftpoint complies with the predictions. Values in bold indicate compliance to weak directionality theory.
Correlation between the degree of sympatry and speciation and extinction rates.
| Clade | Correlation with speciation (γλ) | Correlation with extinction (γμ) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mean | 95% CI | mean | 95% CI | |||
| Athyridida | − | − | − | |||
| Auloporida | 7.84 | 2.49 | 13.90 | 1.01 | −4.98 | 6.98 |
| Bellerophontidae | − | − | − | −3.54 | −5.13 | −2.08 |
| Cystiphyllida | −2.35 | −5.70 | 1.32 | |||
| Cystoporida | − | − | − | |||
| Desmoceratidae | − | − | − | 2.47 | −2.09 | 6.63 |
| Euomphalidae | − | − | − | −0.05 | −2.80 | 3.07 |
| Favositida | − | − | − | |||
| Fenestrida | − | − | − | |||
| Lophospiridae | 5.06 | 2.83 | 7.99 | −4.11 | −7.46 | −0.04 |
| Orthida | − | − | − | |||
| Orthotetida | − | − | − | |||
| Productida | − | − | − | |||
| Proetidae | − | − | − | −14.17 | −22.02 | −7.70 |
| Pterineidae | −17.30 | −38.02 | 0.95 | −16.96 | −37.90 | 3.15 |
| Rhabdomesida | 1.54 | 0.82 | 2.22 | 0.40 | −0.42 | 1.07 |
| Spiriferida | − | − | − | |||
| Spiriferinida | −0.35 | −1.22 | 0.57 | |||
| Stauriida | 0.64 | 0.41 | 0.85 | |||
| Strophomenida | −0.43 | −1.85 | 0.89 | 0.88 | −0.47 | 2.18 |
| Trepostomida | − | − | − | |||
Posterior sampled of the correlations parameters are summarized as mean values and 95% credible intervals (CI). The correlation parameters γλ and γμ quantify the correlation between temporal changes in the birth-death rates and changes in the degree of sympatry. For instance, the speciation rate at time t is λ = λ exp(γλ s), where λ is the estimated baseline speciation rate and s is the degree of sympatry at time t (ref. 11). Values in bold indicate significant negative correlation with speciation and significant positive correlation with extinction rates.