| Literature DB >> 29212454 |
Feng Dong1,2, Chih-Ming Hung3, Xin-Lei Li1, Jian-Yun Gao1, Qiang Zhang4, Fei Wu1, Fu-Min Lei5, Shou-Hsien Li6, Xiao-Jun Yang7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The glacial-interglacial cycles in the Pleistocene caused repeated range expansion and contraction of species in several regions in the world. However, it remains uncertain whether such climate oscillations had similar impact on East Asian biota, despite its widely recognized importance in global biodiversity. Here we use both molecular and ecological niche profiles on 11 East Asian avian species with various elevational ranges to reveal their response to the late Pleistocene climate changes.Entities:
Keywords: Coalescent simulations; East Asian birds; Ecological niche modeling; Last glacial maximum; Last interglacial period; Pleistocene climate change
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29212454 PMCID: PMC5719578 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-017-1100-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Fig. 1The three patterns of ecological niche models (ENMs) and distribution dynamics for birds studied in the present study. (a) Aegithalos concinnus, (b) Yuhina diademata and (c) Spizixos semitorques. For each species, three time points were considered, i.e., the present day (Present), last glacial maximum (LGM; ~26–19 thousand years ago, Ka), and last interglacial period (LIG; ~112–132 Ka). Black dots show species occurrence records rarefied at a 1-km spatial resolution. To avoid over-prediction, the ENMs were transformed to binary (presence/ absence) distribution by a threshold of the maximum training sensitivity plus specificity (MTSS), with detailed logistic values specified in Additional file 1: Table S3
Fig. 2Histograms indicating climatic comparisons. (a) Temperature annual range (Bio_7), (b) Precipitation seasonality (Bio_15) among LIG (black), LGM (dark grey) and Present (light grey) and (c) relations of temperature variations (Bio_7) (y axis) and latitudes (x axis) at LIG. The means of each variable was calculated based on 1506 occurrence records after spatial filtration at 1 km2 of all the combination records of 11 birds. The temperature data are in centigrade, precipitation is in millimeters and the latitudes are in degrees. The asterisk (*) indicates P ≤ 0.001 calculated with a paired-samples T test
Summary information for species studied, including species names, number of sampled individuals and loci, as well as log marginal likelihood for each demographic model. Best fitting models with log Bayes factor generally larger than 3 against others are highlighted in bold
| Species | No. Indsa | No. Locb | Output of LAMARC analyses | Output of BEAST analysesd | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant size | Exponential growth | Logistic growth | Expansion growth | Bayesian Skygrid | ||||
|
| ||||||||
|
| 29 | 25 (25) | 873.09 (623.44, 919.20) | −18,381.02/ | −18,337.58/ | −18,335.44/ | −18,337.65/ |
|
|
| 31 | 26 (26) | 445.00 (213.07, 808.07) | −21,925.05.24/ | −21,321.76/ |
| −21,329.74/ | −21,319.53/ |
|
| 28 | 26 (25) | 864.57 (657.38, 914.89) | −20,866.90/ | −20,816.09/ |
| −20,813.41/ | −20,818.79/ |
|
| 17 | 27 (25) | 254.87 (−288.12, 835.27) | −23,164.78/ | −23,157.21/ | −23,158.79/ |
| −23,165.93/ |
|
| 26 | 27 (25) | 889.45 (721.87, 930.99) | −19,430.79/ | −19,371.60/ |
| −19,373.72/ | −19,371.27/ |
|
| 25 | 26 (26) | 691.00 (119.92, 867.68) | −22,793.63/ | −22,789.32/ |
| −22,781.52/ | −22,558.18/ |
|
| 19 | 28 (26) | 839.81 (−24.42, 896.38) | −22,914.29/ | −22,902.45/ |
| −22,903.01/ | −22,906.41/ |
|
| 34 | 27 (25) | 586.95 (293.02, 854.46) | −19,062.06/ | −19,037.46/ | −19,030.12/ | −19,033.39/ |
|
|
| 26 | 26 (26) | 835.62 (259.03, 881.86) | −19,240.68/ |
|
| −19,228.76/ | −19,229.73/ |
|
| 31 | 31 (30) | 842.18 (431.79, 890.58) | −25,752.35/ | −25,716.61/ | −25,707.27/ |
| −25,718.02/ |
|
| 32 | 25 (25) | 749.45 (240.43, 880.94) | −24,669.52/ | −24,653.90/ |
| −24,654.13/ | −24,657.12/ |
anumber of individuals sampled for each species
bnumber of loci sampled for each species with that finally used in brackets
cthe most probable estimates of population growth rate for each species with 95% credibility intervals (CI) in brackets
dlog marginal likelihood estimates for different species and coalescent models, estimated using path sampling and step-stone procedures
ethis species has two equivalently best-fitted and general similar models, and the model with smallest log marginal likelihood (e.g., logistic growth) was shown in Fig. 2
Fig. 3Demographic reconstruction of the most favored models for each bird studied at 5-fold molecular rates. The colored plot lines represent median posterior estimates of the product of effective population size (N ) and generation time (g). Times are in thousands of years before present (Ka). Timeframes are marked by grey areas. LIG, last interglacial period, ~112–132 Ka; LGM, last glacial maximum, ~19–26 Ka