4.8 Article

Species radiations of symbiotic dinoflagellates in the Atlantic and Indo-Pacific since the miocene-pliocene transition

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 22, 期 3, 页码 570-581

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msi042

关键词

adaptive radiation; climate change; corals; molecular clock; phylogeography; protist evolution; Symbiodinium; symbiosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endosymbiotic dinoflagellates, or zooxanthellae, are required for the survival of a diverse community of invertebrates that construct and dominate shallow, tropical coral reef ecosystems. Molecular systematics applied to this once understudied symbiont partner, Symbiodinium spp., divide the group into divergent lineages or subgeneric clades. Within each clade, numerous closely related types, or species, exhibit distinctive host taxon, geographic, and/or environmental distributions. This diversity is greatest in clade C, which dominates the Indo-Pacific host fauna and shares dominance in the Atlantic-Caribbean with clade B. Two living ancestors in this group, C1 and C3, are common to both the Indo-Pacific and Atlantic-Caribbean. With these exceptions, each ocean possesses a diverse clade C assemblage that appears to have independently evolved (adaptively radiated) through host specialization and allopatric differentiation. This phylogeographic evidence suggests that a worldwide selective sweep of C1/C3, or their progenitor, must have occurred before both oceans separated. The probable timing of this event corresponds with the major climactic changes and low CO2 levels of the late Miocene and/or early Pliocene. Subsequent bursts of diversification have proceeded in each ocean since this transition. An ecoevolutionary expansion to numerous and taxonomically diverse hosts by a select host-generalist symbiont followed by the onset of rapid diversification suggests a radical process through which coral-algal symbioses respond and persist through the vicissitudes of planetary climate change.

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

4.8
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