4.7 Article

Testing the role of climate in speciation: New methods and applications to squamate reptiles (lizards and snakes)

期刊

MOLECULAR ECOLOGY
卷 27, 期 12, 页码 2754-2769

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/mec.14717

关键词

climatic niche; lizards; niche conservatism; niche divergence; snakes; speciation

资金

  1. NIH IRACDA PERT fellowship [K12 GM000708]
  2. NSF [DE 1655690]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Climate may play important roles in speciation, such as causing the range fragmentation that underlies allopatric speciation (through niche conservatism) or driving divergence of parapatric populations along climatic gradients (through niche divergence). Here, we developed new methods to test the frequency of climate niche conservatism and divergence in speciation, and applied it to species pairs of squamate reptiles (lizards and snakes). We used a large-scale phylogeny to identify 242 sister species pairs for analysis. From these, we selected all terrestrial allopatric pairs with sufficient occurrence records (n = 49 pairs) and inferred whether each originated via climatic niche conservatism or climatic niche divergence. Among the 242 pairs, allopatric pairs were most common (41.3%), rather than parapatric (19.4%), partially sympatric (17.7%), or fully sympatric species pairs (21.5%). Among the 49 selected allopatric pairs, most appeared to have originated via climatic niche divergence (61-76%, depending on the details of the methods). Surprisingly, we found greater climatic niche divergence between allopatric sister species than between parapatric pairs, even after correcting for geographic distance. We also found that niche divergence did not increase with time, further implicating niche divergence in driving lineage splitting. Overall, our results suggest that climatic niche divergence may often play an important role in allopatric speciation, and the methodology developed here can be used to address the generality of these findings in other organisms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据