Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:45:40.500Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Species selection and driven mechanisms jointly generate a large-scale morphological trend in monobathrid crinoids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Carl Simpson
Carl Simpson*
Affiliation:
Museum für Naturkunde, Leibniz Institute for Research on Evolution and Biodiversity at the Humboldt University Berlin, Invalidenstrasse 43, D-10115 Berlin, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All evolution attributable to natural selection, at any level, is due to a causal covariance between fitness and phenotype. Over macroevolutionary time scales, species selection is one of many possible mechanisms for generating large-scale morphological trends. For species selection to sort morphology, a correlation between morphology and taxonomic diversification rate must be present. Other trend mechanisms (driven mechanisms, e.g., a bias in the direction of speciation) produce a systematic change in the mean phenotype over time. All mechanisms can co-occur. Here I demonstrate (1) an inverse correlation between diversification rate and calyx complexity that demonstrates the effect of species selection on morphology. Genera with simple calyces tend to increase in diversity, whereas genera with complex calyces have a net decrease in diversity; and (2) the presence of a driven trend mechanism in monobathrid crinoids where descendant genera tend to be simpler than their ancestors. The separate effects of these two classes of trend mechanisms can be combined by using the Price's Theorem, which partitions the contribution to the overall change in calyx complexity over time accurately among selection and driven mechanisms. Price's Theorem provides significant conceptual and methodological clarification of the contribution of multiple and interacting hierarchical mechanisms in generating large-scale trends.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , Summer 2010 , pp. 481 - 496
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Akaike, H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19:716–723.Google Scholar
Alroy, J. 2000. Understanding the dynamics of trends within evolving lineages. Paleobiology 26:319–329.Google Scholar
Arnold, A. J., and Fristrup, K. 1982. The theory of evolution by natural selection: a hierarchical expansion. Paleobiology 8:113–129.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1988. Evolutionary convergence and parallelism in crinoid calyx design. Journal of Paleontology 62:906–916.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., Hess, H., and Simms, M. J. 1999. Crinoid form and function. Pp. 3–30 in Hess, H., Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., and Simms, M. J., eds. Fossil crinoids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Burnham, K. P., and Anderson, D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Cisne, J. L. 1974. Evolution of the world fauna of aquatic free-living arthropods. Evolution 28:337–366.Google Scholar
Foote, M. 2000. Origination and extinction components of taxonomic diversity: general problems. In Erwin, D. H. and Wing, S. L., eds. Deep time: Paleobiology's perspective Paleobiology 26(Suppl. to No. 4):74–102.Google Scholar
Frank, S. A. 1997. The Price Equation, Fisher's fundamental theorem, kin selection, and causal analysis. Evolution 51:1712–1729.Google Scholar
Frank, S. A. 1998. Foundations of social evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1990. Speciation and sorting as the source of evolutionary trends, or ‘things are seldom what they seem.’ Pp. 188–204 in McNamara, K. J., ed. Evolutionary trends. Belhaven, London.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 2002. The structure of evolutionary theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., and Eldredge, N. 1977. Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology 3:115–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gradstein, F. M., Ogg, J. G., and Smith, A. G. 2004. A geological time scale 2004. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Grantham, T. A. 1995. Hierarchical approaches to macroevolution: recent work on species selection and the “effect hypothesis.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 26:301–321.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. 1975. Innate social aptitudes of man: an approach from evolutionary genetics. Pp. 133–155 in Fox, R., ed. Biosocial anthropology. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Harland, W. B., Armstrong, R. L., Cox, A. V., Craig, L. E., Smith, A. G., and Smith, D. G. 1990. A geologic time scale 1989. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hunt, G., Roy, K., and Jablonski, D. 2005. Species-level heritability reaffirmed: a comment on “On the heritability of geographic range sizes.” American Naturalist 166:129–135.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. 1986a. Evolutionary consequences of mass extinctions. Pp. 382–418 in Raup, D. M. and Jablonski, D., eds. Patterns and processes in the history of life. Report of the Dahlem Workshop on Patterns and Processes in the History of Life, Berlin 1985, June 16–21. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. 1986b. Larval ecology and macroevolution in marine invertebrates. Bulletin of Marine Science 39:565–587.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. 1987. Heritability at the species level: analysis of geographic ranges of cretaceous mollusks. Science 238:360–363.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 2006. The “Age of Crinoids”: a Mississippian biodiversity spike coincident with widespread carbonate ramps. Palaios 21:238–248.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1978. Family Platycrinitidae. Pp. T515–T516 in Ubaghs, G., et al. Echinodermata 2 (Crinoidea). Part T (2) of Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C., eds. Treatise on invertebrate paleontology. University of Kansas and the Geological Society of America, Lawrence, Kans. Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. 1970. The units of selection. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1:1–18.Google Scholar
Lieberman, B. S., Allmon, W. D., and Eldredge, N. 1993. Levels of selection and macroevolutionary patterns in the turritellid gastropods. Paleobiology 19:205–215.Google Scholar
Liow, L. H. 2006. Do deviants live longer? Morphology and longevity in trachyleberidid ostracodes. Paleobiology 32:55–69.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. 1991. Complexity and evolution: what everybody knows. Biology and Philosophy 6:303–324.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. 1992. A metric for the study of evolutionary trends in the complexity of serial structures. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 45:39–55.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. 1994. Mechanisms of large-scale evolutionary trends. Evolution 48:1747–1763.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. 2000. Trends, tools, and terminology. Paleobiology 26:330–333.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Laudon, L. R. 1943. Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids. Geological Society of America Special Paper 46.Google Scholar
Okasha, S. 2007. Evolution and the levels of selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Price, G. R. 1972. Extension of covariance selection mathematics. Annals of Human Genetics 35:485–490.Google Scholar
Rice, S. H. 2004. Evolutionary theory: mathematical and conceptual foundations. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass. Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., Jablonski, D., and Foote, M. 2002. A compendium of fossil marine animal genera. Paleontological Research Institution, Ithaca, N.Y. Google Scholar
Sidor, C. A. 2001. Simplification as a trend in synapsid cranial evolution. Evolution 55:1419–1442.Google Scholar
Simms, M. J. 1990. Crinoids. Pp. 188–204 in McNamara, K. J., ed. Evolutionary trends. Belhaven, London.Google Scholar
Simpson, C., and Harnik, P. 2009. Assessing the role of abundance in marine bivalve extinction over the post-Paleozoic. Paleobiology 35:631–647.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1973. An explanation for Cope's rule. Evolution 27:1–26.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1975. A theory of evolution above the species level. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 72:646–650.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1979. Macroevolution. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978. Evolution of camerate crinoids. Pp. T281–T292 in Ubaghs, G., et al. Echinodermata 2 (Crinoidea). Part T (1) of Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C., eds. Treatise on invertebrate paleontology. University of Kansas and the Geological Society of America, Lawrence, Kans. Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. 1975. Group selection, sex, and fossils. Evolution 29:87–94.Google Scholar
Wagner, P. J. 1996. Contrasting the underlying patterns of active trends in morphologic evolution. Evolution 50:990–1007.Google Scholar
Wagner, P. J., Kosnik, M. A., and Lidgard, S. 2006. Abundance distributions imply elevated complexity of post-Paleozoic marine ecosystems. Science 314:1289–1292.Google Scholar
Wang, S. C. 2001. Quantifying passive and driven large-scale evolutionary trends. Evolution 55:849–858.Google Scholar