An improved procedure for testing the effects of key innovations on rate of speciation
An improved procedure for testing the effects of key innovations on rate of speciation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1086/303190
复制
发表时间：
1999-05-01
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Goudet, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Goudet, J
近年来，关键创新（例如，昆虫的植食性，Mitter et al. 1988;鱼类的胎生，Slowinski and Guyer 1993）对物种形成率的影响一直是进化生物学的主要焦点（Sanderson and Donoghue 1996）。物种数量的许多明显变化可能与简单的物种发生随机模型一致，因为在随机物种形成和灭绝的零模型下，所有程度的物种多样性都是同样可能的（Farris 1976; Slowinski和Guyer 1993;但请参见Losos和Adler 1995）。因此，援引一个关键创新来解释一个拥有创新的单一群体相对于一个不拥有创新的姐妹群体的多样性是站不住脚的。然而，如果考虑到几个到多个姐妹群，可以设计出性状拥有和物种数量之间正相关的测试（Slowinski和Guyer 1993）。第一个遵循这条道路的是Mitter等人。（1988），他发现了植食性和昆虫物种数量之间的显著正相关。为了测试这种关联，他们使用了符号测试。Slowinski和Guyer（1993）提出了一种改进的、保守性较低的方法，该方法基于随机灭绝和物种形成的零模型。在该模型下，首先计算具有创新的每个群体与其姐妹群体之间观察到物种数量差异较大或更大的概率（P值或pi）。然后使用Fisher广泛提倡的亲，
The effect of key innovations (eg, phytophagy in insects, Mitter et al. 1988; viviparity in fishes, Slowinski and Guyer 1993) on speciation rates has been a major focus of evolutionary biology in recent years (Sanderson and Donoghue 1996). Much of the apparent variability in species number might be consistent with simple stochastic models of phylogenesis, since all degrees of species diversity are equally likely under a null model of random speciation and extinction (Farris 1976; Slowinski and Guyer 1993; but see Losos and Adler 1995). Therefore, invoking a key innovation to explain the diversity of one single group possessing the innovation against a sister group not possessing it is not tenable. However, if several to many sister groups are considered, tests of positive association between the possession of the trait and species number can be designed (Slowinski and Guyer 1993). The first to follow this path were Mitter et al.(1988), who found a significant positive association between phytophagy and number of insect species. To test the association, they used a sign test. Slowinski and Guyer (1993) suggested an improved, less conservative method, based on a null model of random extinction and speciation. Under this model, the probability (P value or pi) of observing disparity as large or larger in species number between each group possessing the innovation and its sister group is first calculated. The different P values obtained are then combined using Fisher’s widely advocated pro-