• Save
Phylogenies help to uncover diversity patterns in Neotropical amphibians
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Phylogenies help to uncover diversity patterns in Neotropical amphibians

on

  • 342 views

My oral presentation at the 49th Annual Meeting of ATBC, Bonito 2012

My oral presentation at the 49th Annual Meeting of ATBC, Bonito 2012

Statistics

Views

Total Views
342
Views on SlideShare
342
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • There’s a growing interest in incorporating phylogenetic information into measures of biological diversity and also in investigating diversity patterns as we saw this morning in the talk by Dr. Faith. The rationale for this is that phylogeny represents a multivariate proxy for trait diversity, as long we assume that there is phylogenetic signal in traits.
  • Concurrently, environmental gradients have been shown to influence species sorting in freshwater metacommunities, specially pond canopy cover and hydroperiod
  • For example, pond canopy cover can be viewed as a productivity gradient in which closed-canopy ponds represent harsh environments that hold low species diversity. But we don’t have a good idea of what is the importance of these factors in lineage filtering of freshwater organisms.
  • So I investigate …
  • I sampled tadpoles in 13 ponds in the Serra da Bocaina National Park in SE Brazil, at the boudary between the states od SP and RJ
  • From june 2008 to july 2009, ponds were arranged along a canopy cover gradient
  • This is the spatial arrangement of ponds
  • I built a phylogenetic super-tree for species occurring in this metacommunity based on previous phylogenetic purproses, which was dated using the bladj algorithim of the Phylocom software. Then I extracted a patristic distance matrix from this phylogeny.
  • I rely on recent techniques to relate phylogenetic structure at the metacommunity level to environmental gradients, largely developed by Leandro Duarte and colaborators
  • This procedures briefly as follows: the species distance matrix is converted into a squared matrix the depicts the degrees of belonging of species, which is then multiplied by a site by species matrix to give the phylogeny-weighted species composition matrix, from which a series of principal coordenate eigenvectors called PCPS are extracted after a PCoA analysis. After a selection, these eigenVectors are included in a db-RDA analysis as response variables along with environmental variables as predictor variables. So with this technique I could relate the phylogeentic metacommunity structure to environmental variables.
  • And this is what I got. The first two PCPS were selected to be used in the db-RDA, which explained about 52% of the variation in phylogenetic metacommunity structure. Basically, hylid lineages were associated with increasing % of pond canopy cover. Floating vegetation separated the two main hylid clades: Cophomantini and Dendropsophryni. Calamitophrynia, the remainig clade were associated with open areas
  • In Conclusion, pond canopy cover seems to have a profound effect on amphibian metacommunity structure and is a strong filter not only for species but also for entire clades. These results are mainly related to differences in habitat use among clades at the landscape level. I suggest the traits related to habitat use, morphology and reproductive modes should be included in further analyses to answer what specific traits are being filtered.

Phylogenies help to uncover diversity patterns in Neotropical amphibians Phylogenies help to uncover diversity patterns in Neotropical amphibians Presentation Transcript

  • PHYLOGENIES HELP TO UNCOVERDIVERSITY PATTERNS INNEOTROPICAL AMPHIBIANS Diogo B. Provete Universidade Federal de Goiás Goiânia, GO, Brazil
  • Sciobt pol Scic Hyp ro Sc er lp id Ap ua Scis qua a he BokIntroduction Denmin Bokcir ic Chim nm an De ct Pr hii om R el fur Phy Phybar Lep olf Recent interest in incorporating phylogenetic information into measures of biological diversity Rationale: Phylogeny as a multivariate proxy for traits (assuming phylogenetic signal)
  • Sciobt pol Scic Hyp ro S er cid lp Ap ua Scis e qua kah BoIntroduction Denmin Bokcir ic Ch nm im an De ct Pr hii o m R el Phy fur Phybar Lep olf Habitat filtering/species sorting => environmental variables in ponds (e.g., pond canopy cover and hydroperiod) Wellborn et al. 1996; Skelly et al. 2002; Werner et al. 2007
  • Sciobt pol Scic Hyp ro Sc er plp id ua A Scis qua ahe BokDenmin Bokcir ic Ch nm ima De n ct Pr hii om R el Phy rfu Phybar Lep olf Pond canopy cover Floating vegetation Werner et al. 2007
  • Sciobt pol Scic Hyp ro S er cid lp Ap ua Scis e qua kah BoAim Denmin Bokcir ic Ch nm im an De ct Pr hii o m R el Phy fur Phybar Lep olf I investigated the influence of pond canopy cover,pond area, floating vegetation, and depth on linage sorting in a metacommunity of pond tadpoles in a mountain environment in SE Brazil
  • June 2008 to July 2009
  • PP4 PP3 AP1 AP2 PT1 PT3 PT2 PP1 PP2
  • Results Measurements (mm). Mean and standard deviation (range) of seven tadpoles: total length: 18.2 ± 0.1 (17.6–18.5); body length: 6.8 ± 0.1 (6.6–7.0); tail length: 11.3 ± 0.1 (11.0–11.5); body height: 3.2 ± 0.0 (3.1–3.2); tail height: 3.4 ± 0.0 (3.2–3.5); eye diameter: 1.0 ± 0.0 (0.9–1.0); nostril diameter: 0.4 ± 0.0 (0.4–0.5); body width: 4.7 ± 0.1 (4.4–4.8); interorbital distance: 1.3 ± 0.0 (1.2–1.6); eye-snout distance: 1.6 ± 0.0 (1.6–1.7); spiracle- snout distance: 5.1 ± 0.1 (4.8–5.4); nostril-snout distance: 0.8 ± 0.0 (0.7–1.0); mouth width: 1.6 ± 0.0 (1.6–1.7). FIGURE 1. Tadpole of Physalaemus soaresi, stage 33 (Gosner 1960). (A) Lateral view, (B) dorsal view, and (C) ventral view. External morphology. ZUFRJ 7436. Body ovoid in dorsal view, wider than high (Fig. 1AB); body height 45% of body length and 67% of body width. Eyes dorsolateral with diameter 14% of body length; distance between eyes 27% of body width. Nostrils ovoid, half-way between the snout and eyes; distance from snout to nostrils 12% of body length; nostril diameter 50% of the snout to nostril distance. Spiracle sinistral, short, opening in PHYSALAEMUS SOARESI © 2005 Magnolia Press 37Jur Cretaceous Cenozoic
  •  PCPS 1 and 2 Canonical R2= 0.523 P<0.05
  • Sciobt lpo Sci Hyp cro Sc er lp id Ap uaDiscussion Scis qua ahe Bo k Denmin Bokcir Ch mic im Den an t Pr iic om Rh el r Phy fu Phybar Lep olf Canopy cover => strong filter not only for species but also for entire clades, this influence is on deeper levels of the phylogeny Differences in habitat use patterns among clades Next step: inclusion of traits related to habitat use, morphology, and reproductive modes => what traits are being filtered?
  • Thank you! dbprovete@gmail.comWeb site => http://bit.ly/frogs_atbc Student Travel Award