Phylogenetic approaches in comparative physiology
Author:
Garland Theodore1, Bennett Albert F.2, Rezende Enrico L.1
Affiliation:
1. Department of Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521,USA 2. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California,Irvine, CA 92697, USA
Abstract
SUMMARYOver the past two decades, comparative biological analyses have undergone profound changes with the incorporation of rigorous evolutionary perspectives and phylogenetic information. This change followed in large part from the realization that traditional methods of statistical analysis tacitly assumed independence of all observations, when in fact biological groups such as species are differentially related to each other according to their evolutionary history. New phylogenetically based analytical methods were then rapidly developed, incorporated into `the comparative method', and applied to many physiological, biochemical, morphological and behavioral investigations. We now review the rationale for including phylogenetic information in comparative studies and briefly discuss three methods for doing this(independent contrasts, generalized least-squares models, and Monte Carlo computer simulations). We discuss when and how to use phylogenetic information in comparative studies and provide several examples in which it has been helpful, or even crucial, to a comparative analysis. We also consider some difficulties with phylogenetically based statistical methods, and of comparative approaches in general, both practical and theoretical. It is our personal opinion that the incorporation of phylogeny information into comparative studies has been highly beneficial, not only because it can improve the reliability of statistical inferences, but also because it continually emphasizes the potential importance of past evolutionary history in determining current form and function.
Publisher
The Company of Biologists
Subject
Insect Science,Molecular Biology,Animal Science and Zoology,Aquatic Science,Physiology,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference162 articles.
1. Abouheif, E. (1999). A method to test the assumption of phylogenetic independence in comparative data. Evol. Ecol. Res.1,895-909. 2. Ackerly, D. D. (1999). Comparative plant ecology and the role of phylogenetic information. In Physiological Plant Ecology. The 39th Symposium of the British Ecological Society,University of York 7-9 September 1998 (ed. M. C. Press, J. D. Scholes and M. G. Braker), pp. 391-413. Oxford, UK:Blackwell Science. 3. Ackerly, D. D. (2000). Taxon sampling,correlated evolution, and independent contrasts. Evolution54,1480-1492. 4. Ackerly, D. D. (2004). Adaptation, niche conservatism, and convergence: Comparative studies of leaf evolution in the California chaparral. Am. Nat.163,654-671. 5. Ackerly, D. A., Dudley, S. A., Sultan, S. E., Schmitt, J.,Coleman, J. S., Linder, R., Sandquist, D. R., Geber, M. A., Evans, A. S., Dawson, T. E. et al. (2000). The evolution of plant ecophysiological traits: recent advances and future directions. BioScience50,979-995.
Cited by
550 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|