UNDESIRABLE CONSEQUENCES OF NEGLECTING NONLINEARITY: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS BY LIEFTING ET AL. (2013) ON ROCHA & KLACZKO (2012)
UNDESIRABLE CONSEQUENCES OF NEGLECTING NONLINEARITY: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS BY LIEFTING ET AL. (2013) ON ROCHA & KLACZKO (2012)
复制标题
忽视非线性的不良后果：对 LIEFTING 等人的评论的回应。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. B. Klaczko
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Rocha;L. B. Klaczko
作为对我们之前研究的回应，Liefting等人为他们关于发育速率反应规范（RN）纬度变化的工作辩护，认为（1）发育速率（发育时间的倒数：速率=时间-1）是比发育时间更具生物学相关性的变量;（2）线性RN模型是一个有效的近似;（3）三个实验点足以估计RN参数。在此，我们对他们的评论作出答复。首先，我们给出的证据表明，实际发展的复杂性挑战了发展速度的吸引力的简单性。使用与Liefting等人相同的分析来检验他们的假设，用发展时间而不是速度，揭示了一种与他们的结论相反的模式。其次，我们证明了二次模型与整个开发时间RN一致，并解释了这种矛盾。第三，对于二次模型，我们引入了两个参数来研究塑性：RN形状（二次系数）和RN局部塑性（RN函数的导数）。第一个表现出与纬度的统计学显著相关性;第二个表现出连续的变化模式，其中所有的局部模式都可以找到（与纬度的正相关、负相关或不显著相关），但肯定不能概括。
In response to our previous study, Liefting et al. argue, in defense of their work on latitudinal variation of developmental‐rate reaction norms (RNs), that (1) developmental rate (the reciprocal of development time: rate = time−1) is a more biologically relevant variable than development time; (2) the linear RN model is a valid approximation; and (3) three experimental points suffice to estimate RN parameters. Here, we reply to their comments. First, we give evidence that the complexity of actual development challenges the appealing simplicity of developmental rate. Using the same analysis as Liefting et al. to test their hypothesis with development time, instead of rate, reveals a pattern that is the opposite of their conclusion. Second, we show that a quadratic model is consistent with the whole development‐time RNs and explains this contradiction. Third, with the quadratic model, we introduce two parameters to study plasticity: the RN shape (the quadratic coefficient) and RN local plasticity (the derivative of the RN function). The first showed a statistically significant correlation with latitude; and the second showed a continuous variation pattern where all localized patterns can be found (positive, negative, or nonsignificant correlations with latitude) but certainly cannot be generalized.