| Literature DB >> 35414237 |
Renske E Onstein1, W Daniel Kissling2, H Peter Linder3.
Abstract
The Cretaceous-Palaeogene (K-Pg) extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs (66 Ma) led to a 25 million year gap of megaherbivores (>1000 kg) before the evolution of megaherbivorous mammals in the Late Eocene (40 Ma). The botanical consequences of this 'Palaeocene megaherbivore gap' (PMHG) remain poorly explored. We hypothesize that the absence of megaherbivores should result in changes in the diversification and trait evolution of associated plant lineages. We used phylogenetic time- and trait-dependent diversification models with palms (Arecaceae) and show that the PMHG was characterized by speciation slowdowns, decreased evolution of armature and increased evolution of megafaunal (≥4 cm) fruits. This suggests that the absence of browsing by megaherbivores during the PMHG may have led to a loss of defence traits, but the absence of megaherbivorous seed dispersers did not lead to a loss of megafaunal fruits. Instead, increases in PMHG fruit sizes may be explained by simultaneously rising temperatures, rainforest expansion, and the subsequent radiation of seed-dispersing birds and mammals. We show that the profound impact of the PMHG on plant diversification can be detected even with the overwriting of adaptations by the subsequent Late Eocene opening up of megaherbivore-associated ecological opportunities. Our study provides a quantitative, comparative framework to assess diversification and adaptation during one of the most enigmatic periods in angiosperm history.Entities:
Keywords: Palmae; adaptation; defensive organs; extinction; herbivory; plant functional trait
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35414237 PMCID: PMC9006001 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2021.2633
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.530
Hypotheses and predictions on trait evolution and diversification during the megaherbivore gap. Predictions for lineages with trait states associated with megaherbivores (large/megafaunal fruits, armature) or not (opposite trait states: small fruits and no armature) are defined to provide a comparative framework for the analysis. Support for these predictions from our analyses of palms (Arecaceae) is provided in the last two columns. PMHG = Palaeocene megaherbivore gap.
| hypothesis | prediction for megaherbivore traits (large fruits, armature) | prediction for the opposite trait states (small fruits, no armature) | support from megafaunal fruit evolution | support from armature evolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1: trait states associated with megaherbivores (e.g. large fruits, armature) appear in the Cretaceous (>66 Ma) in concordance with the presence of megaherbivorous, non-avian dinosaurs | ancestral trait reconstructions should indicate a high probability of the presence of megaherbivore traits in Cretaceous palm lineages | ancestral trait reconstructions should indicate a low probability of the presence of non-megaherbivore traits in Cretaceous palm lineages | supported ( | supported ( |
| H2: speciation rates of lineages with megaherbivore traits (e.g. large fruits, armature) are higher in the presence of megaherbivores (i.e. Cretaceous and Late Eocene-to-present) than during the PMHG (66–40 Ma), due to ecological opportunities created by megaherbivores | lower speciation rates of lineages with megaherbivore traits during the PMHG compared to the megaherbivore periods | equal or higher speciation rates of lineages with non- megaherbivore traits during the PMHG compared to the megaherbivore periods | not supported—rates of lineages with megafaunal fruits are constant through time ( | partly supported—rates of lineages with (figures |
| H3: trait states associated with megaherbivores (e.g. large fruits, armature) appear more frequently in presence of megaherbivores (i.e. Cretaceous and Late Eocene-to-present) than during the PMHG (66–40 Ma) | lower transition rates to megafaunal fruits and armature during the PMHG compared to the megaherbivore periods | equal or higher transition rates to small fruits and armature loss during the PMHG compared to the megaherbivore periods | not supported—rates of megafaunal fruit evolution are higher during the PMHG ( | partly supported—rates of armature evolution are lower ( |
Figure 1Traitgrams illustrating the evolution of log-transformed fruit lengths in palms (Arecaceae) over geological time. (a) Without fossil fruit size constraint; (b) including the constraint of fossil fruits belonging to ancestral Nypa palms in genus Nipadites. The traitgram relies on maximum-likelihood ancestral state reconstruction and is a projection of the phylogenetic tree in a space defined by fruit size (n = 2054 species). Confidence intervals of the maximum-likelihood estimates at the internal nodes are indicated with the blue colour. Only names of extant species with some of the largest and smallest palm fruits are indicated at the tips. Red triangles (n = 45) and squares (n = 45) illustrate, respectively, (maximum) seed and fruit fossil size, using the midpoint of the epoch the fossil was found in. This figure supports the hypothesis that Cretaceous palms already possessed large, megafaunal fruits ≥4 cm (H1, table 1). The grey bar (between stippled lines) reflects the megaherbivore gap (PMHG). (Online version in colour.)
Figure 2Evolution of leaf and stem armature in palms (Arecaceae). Ancestral state reconstructions were performed using stochastic character mapping. The posterior probability (PP, between 0 and 1) of ancestral lineages possessing armature is indicated with the yellow colour (i.e. more yellow means higher probability of having armature; black colour is intermediate and thus illustrates an equivocal state, grey means low probability of having armature), suggesting that Cretaceous palms probably had stem armature, but possibly not leaf armature (H1, table 1). The probability of armature at the root node is indicated. Armature evolved at least eight times independently in palms (indicated with the asterisks, simultaneous occurrences of leaf and stem armature are indicated with a double asterisk). Most origins occurred in subfamilies Coryphoideae (e.g. typical spinescent genera Brahea, Coccothrinax, Copernicia, Corypha, Cryosophila, Hyphaene, Licuala, Livistona, Phoenix and Trithrinax) and Arecoideae (e.g. genera Aiphanes, Astrocaryum, Bactris, Butia and Desmoncus) and happened from 40 Ma onwards, when megaherbivorous mammals had evolved. Subfamilies are indicated at the tips of the phylogenetic tree. The grey bar (between stippled lines) reflects the megaherbivore gap (PMHG). For the evolution of stem and leaf armature combined, see electronic supplementary material, figure S4. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 3Speciation and transition rates of palm (Arecaceae) lineages with megaherbivore traits (megafaunal fruits and armature) before, during and after the megaherbivore gap (66–40 Ma). (a), (b) and (c) evaluate speciation slowdowns in the PMHG (H2, table 1), whereas (d), (e) and (f) evaluate whether trait evolution rates decreased in the PMHG (H3, table 1). (a) Speciation rate of megafaunal fruits; (b) speciation rate of armature (leaf and stem combined); (c) speciation rate of stem armature; (d) transition rate of evolving megafaunal fruits; (e) transition rate of evolving armature (leaf and stem combined); (f) transition rate of evolving stem armature. Megafaunal fruits were defined as ≥4 cm in length. Rates were inferred by fitting time-dependent binary state speciation and extinction (BiSSE) models to the phylogenetic data. BiSSE models were selected using maximum-likelihood optimization, and box-and-whiskers show 95% posterior densities of the rates resulting from Bayesian MCMC analyses over 100 phylogenetic trees, based on the diversification model with the best fit (see electronic supplementary material, tables S1–S3). Rates are given in lineages per million years. For comparison, rates of palm lineages with small fruits or those lacking armature are illustrated in electronic supplementary material, figure S1. (Online version in colour.)
Change in selective regime during the Palaeocene megaherbivore gap (PMHG) (66–40 million years ago), and the theoretical predictions for plant and animal diversification and trait evolution. Radiations or diversification slowdowns are expected due to, respectively, a gain or loss of ecological opportunity associated with megaherbivores. These predictions largely follow the Late Quaternary megaherbivore ecology as outlined in [5].
| megaherbivore ecology | PMHG selective regime shift (D = direct, I = indirect) | related plant or animal traits | PMHG diversification rate shift | PMHG trait shift |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| long-distance dispersal of large, ‘megafaunal’ fruits [ | D: loss of seed dispersal | megafaunal ‘overbuilt’ fruits | slowdown in lineages with megafaunal fruits | decrease in fruit size |
| debarking or breaking trees, trampling seedlings, browsing or grazing [ | D: herbivory release | plant escape traits (e.g. rapid growth in juvenile stage, large plant height) | slowdown in lineages with megaherbivore escape traits | loss of escape traits |
| plant armature (e.g. spines, thorns) | slowdown in lineages with armature traits | loss of armature traits | ||
| plant architecture (e.g. rhizomatous or prostate growth, divaricate branching, resprouting) | slowdown in lineages with architectural megaherbivore resistance traits | loss of architectural resistance traits | ||
| other resistance traits (e.g. leaf palatability or latex, high wood density) | slowdown in lineages with structural or chemical megaherbivore resistance traits | loss of resistance traits | ||
| plant defence traits (e.g. extrafloral nectaries [EFNs] associated with ant defence) [ | slowdown in lineages with megaherbivore defence traits (e.g. EFNs) | loss of defence traits | ||
| host for (ecto- and endo-) parasites [ | D: loss of host | parasite traits related to host resource use | slowdown in parasitic lineages specialized on megaherbivore hosts | host-switching |
| prey for (micro- and large carnivorous) predators [ | D: loss of prey | predator traits related to prey resource use | slowdown in predator lineages preying on megaherbivores | diet/prey- switching, body size decrease |
| dung associations with dung beetles (Scarabaeidae) [ | D: loss of dung | dung beetle diet traits and body size | slowdown in large-bodied dung beetle lineages | diet-switching between faecal types, body size decrease |
| large, conspicuous carcasses for scavengers [ | D: loss of large carcasses | scavenger traits related to carcass resource use | slowdown in large-bodied scavenger lineages (e.g. vultures) | diet-switching, body size decrease, change in skull morphology, reduced niche width/specialization |
| other interactions with birds (e.g. parasite cleaning, megaherbivore faeces as foraging sites or nest material, etc.) [ | D: loss of specialized interaction partner | specialized interaction traits | slowdown in megaherbivore-associated bird lineages (e.g. oxpeckers) | diet-switching, behavioural change |
| physically opening the vegetation, breaking trees [ | I: dense, closed forest, loss of open habitat (unless fire replaced megaherbivores) | forest traits (e.g. tree growth form, large plant heights, seed size, biotic seed dispersal) | radiation of forest lineages, large trees, large seeds, lineages with biotic dispersal | gain of forest traits |
| arborescent and understory lifestyle | radiation of arborescent or understory animals (e.g. monkeys, birds) [ | gain of arborescent or understory lifestyle traits | ||
| shade-tolerance | radiation of shade-tolerant, understory lineages (e.g. shade-loving grasses, lianas, epiphytes) | gain of shade-tolerance traits | ||
| open habitat traits (e.g. narrow leaves, grasses) | slowdown in open habitat lineages (e.g. light-loving grasses, narrow-leaved lineages) | loss of open habitat traits |