4.2 Article

Terrestrial versus aquatic phenotypes correlate with hydrological predictability of habitats in a semiterrestrial salamander (Urodela, Plethodontidae)

期刊

BIOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
卷 91, 期 2, 页码 227-238

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00793.x

关键词

adaptation; community; Desmognathus; moisture; terrestrial; variation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Terrestrial adaptations by small, desmognathine salamanders in Appalachian stream communities have been viewed as evolved responses to large, aquatic, predatory congeners. We tested the role of moisture in the development of adaptive phenotypes in the small, semiterrestrial Desmognathus ocoee. We measured indicators of relative terrestrial vs. aquatic phenotypes (i.e. tolerance of desiccation, anatomical depression of body/tail) using individuals from stream habitats having different flow regimes within each of three geographical locations. Salamanders from intermittent, first-order streams exhibited greater desiccation tolerance, took longer to reach tolerance limits, and had more anatomically depressed bodies/tails than those from second-order, perennial streams, regardless of location. Phenotypes of salamanders from second-order streams showed aquatic tendencies. Phenotypic variation was consistent with relative habitat stability and not with relative abundance of large congeners. MtDNA analysis revealed that individuals grouped together based on geographical location and not habitat type, implying that the observed phenotypic differences arose in situ at each geographical location. Recent phylogenetic reconstructions of the Desmognathus indicate that large, aquatic forms are derived, and their appearance corresponds with the late Cenozoic development of modern Appalachian topography. We propose that radiation of desmognathine lifestyles and associated phenotypes tracked the formation of moisture-stability gradients associated with the creation of cool, wet, montane habitats. (C) 2007 The Linnean Society of London.

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

4.2
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