Literature DB >> 29046549

Adult frogs and tadpoles have different macroevolutionary patterns across the Australian continent.

Emma Sherratt1, Marta Vidal-García2, Marion Anstis3, J Scott Keogh2.   

Abstract

Developmental changes through an animal's life are generally understood to contribute to the resulting adult morphology. Possible exceptions are species with complex life cycles, where individuals pass through distinct ecological and morphological life stages during their ontogeny, ending with metamorphosis to the adult form. Antagonistic selection is expected to drive low genetic correlations between life stages, theoretically permitting stages to evolve independently. Here we describe, using Australian frog radiation, the evolutionary consequences on morphological evolution when life stages are under different selective pressures. We use morphometrics to characterize body shape of tadpoles and adults across 166 species of frog and investigate similarities in the two resulting morphological spaces (morphospaces) to test for concerted evolution across metamorphosis in trait variation during speciation. A clear pattern emerges: Australian frogs and their tadpoles are evolving independently; their markedly different morphospaces and contrasting estimated evolutionary histories of body shape diversification indicate that different processes are driving morphological diversification at each stage. Tadpole morphospace is characterized by rampant homoplasy, convergent evolution and high lineage density. By contrast, the adult morphospace shows greater phylogenetic signal, low lineage density and divergent evolution between the main clades. Our results provide insight into the macroevolutionary consequences of a biphasic life cycle.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29046549     DOI: 10.1038/s41559-017-0268-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol        ISSN: 2397-334X            Impact factor:   15.460


  8 in total

1.  Rapid phenotypic evolution following shifts in life cycle complexity.

Authors:  Ronald M Bonett; John G Phillips; Nicholus M Ledbetter; Samuel D Martin; Luke Lehman
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  No link between nymph and adult coloration in shield bugs: weak selection by predators.

Authors:  Iliana Medina; Regina Vega-Trejo; Thomas Wallenius; Damien Esquerré; Constanza León; Daniela M Perez; Megan L Head
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  From cryptic to colorful: Evolutionary decoupling of larval and adult color in butterflies.

Authors:  Iliana Medina; Regina Vega-Trejo; Thomas Wallenius; Matthew R E Symonds; Devi Stuart-Fox
Journal:  Evol Lett       Date:  2019-12-12

4.  Size, microhabitat, and loss of larval feeding drive cranial diversification in frogs.

Authors:  Carla Bardua; Anne-Claire Fabre; Julien Clavel; Margot Bon; Kalpana Das; Edward L Stanley; David C Blackburn; Anjali Goswami
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  A near-natural experiment on factors influencing larval drift in Salamandra salamandra.

Authors:  Malwina Schafft; Norman Wagner; Tobias Schuetz; Michael Veith
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Ontogenetic drivers of morphological evolution in monitor lizards and allies (Squamata: Paleoanguimorpha), a clade with extreme body size disparity.

Authors:  Carlos J Pavón-Vázquez; Damien Esquerré; J Scott Keogh
Journal:  BMC Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-02-12

7.  Transcriptomic evidence for visual adaptation during the aquatic to terrestrial metamorphosis in leopard frogs.

Authors:  Ryan K Schott; Rayna C Bell; Ellis R Loew; Kate N Thomas; David J Gower; Jeffrey W Streicher; Matthew K Fujita
Journal:  BMC Biol       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 7.364

8.  Juvenile ecology drives adult morphology in two insect orders.

Authors:  Peter T Rühr; Thomas van de Kamp; Tomáš Faragó; Jörg U Hammel; Fabian Wilde; Elena Borisova; Carina Edel; Melina Frenzel; Tilo Baumbach; Alexander Blanke
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 5.349

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.