Abstract
Several theories predict that rates of phenotypic evolution should be related to the rate at which new lineages arise. However, drawing general conclusions regarding the coupling between these fundamental evolutionary rates has been difficult due to the inconsistent nature of previous results combined with uncertainty over the most appropriate methodology with which to investigate such relationships. Here we propose and compare the performance of several different approaches for testing associations between lineage-specific rates of speciation and phenotypic evolution using phylogenetic data. We then use the best-performing method to test relationships between rates of speciation and body size evolution in five major vertebrate clades (amphibians, birds, mammals, ray-finned fish and squamate reptiles) at two phylogenetic scales. Our results provide support for the long-standing view that rates of speciation and morphological evolution are generally positively related at broad macroevolutionary scales, but they also reveal a substantial degree of heterogeneity in the strength and direction of these associations at finer scales across the vertebrate tree of life.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All data used in the study is sourced from publicly assessible sources. Compiled datasets are available as Supplementary Data.
Code availability
R code is available at https://github.com/christophercooney/Cor-STRATES.
References
Simpson, G. G. The Major Features of Evolution (Columbia Univ. Press, 1953).
Simpson, G. G. Tempo and Mode in Evolution (Columbia Univ. Press, 1944).
Cooney, C. R. et al. Mega-evolutionary dynamics of the adaptive radiation of birds. Nature 542, 344–347 (2017).
Jetz, W., Thomas, G. H., Joy, J. B., Hartmann, K. & Mooers, A. O. The global diversity of birds in space and time. Nature 491, 444–448 (2012).
Venditti, C., Meade, A. & Pagel, M. Multiple routes to mammalian diversity. Nature 479, 393–396 (2011).
Rabosky, D. L. et al. An inverse latitudinal gradient in speciation rate for marine fishes. Nature 559, 392–395 (2018).
Stanley, S. M. Macroevolution: Pattern and Process (Freeman, 1979).
Reznick, D. N. & Ricklefs, R. E. Darwin’s bridge between microevolution and macroevolution. Nature 457, 837–842 (2009).
Gould, S. J. & Eldredge, N. Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology 3, 115–151 (1977).
Vermeij, G. J. Biological versatility and earth history. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 70, 1936–1938 (1973).
Vermeij, G. J. Adaptation, versatility, and evolution. Syst. Zool. 22, 466–477 (1973).
Liem, K. F. Biological versitility, evolution, and food resource exploitation in African cichlid fishes. Am. Zool. 15, 427–454 (1975).
Schluter, D. The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation (Oxford Univ. Press, 2000).
Lovette, I. J., Bermingham, E. & Ricklefs, R. E. Clade-specific morphological diversification and adaptive radiation in Hawaiian songbirds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 269, 37–42 (2002).
Grant, P. R. & Grant, B. R. How and Why Species Multiply: The Radiation of Darwin’s Finches (Princeton Univ. Press, 2008).
Danely, P. D. & Kocher, T. D. Speciation in rapidly diverging systems: lessons from Lake Malawi. Mol. Ecol. 10, 1075–1086 (2001).
Losos, J. B. et al. Niche lability in the evolution of a Caribbean lizard community. Nature 424, 542–545 (2003).
Czekanski-Moir, J. E. & Rundell, R. J. The ecology of nonecological speciation and nonadaptive radiations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 34, 400–415 (2019).
Rundell, R. J. & Price, T. D. Adaptive radiation, nonadaptive radiation, ecological speciation and nonecological speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 394–399 (2009).
Svensson, E. I. Non-ecological speciation, niche conservatism and thermal adaptation: how are they connected? Org. Divers. Evol. 12, 229–240 (2012).
Wollenberg Valero, K. C. et al. Patterns, mechanisms and genetics of speciation in reptiles and amphibians. Genes 10, 646 (2019).
Mendelson, T. C., Martin, M. D. & Flaxman, S. M. Mutation-order divergence by sexual selection: diversification of sexual signals in similar environments as a first step in speciation. Ecol. Lett. 17, 1053–1066 (2014).
Rabosky, D. L. & Adams, D. C. Rates of morphological evolution are correlated with species richness in salamanders. Evolution 66, 1807–1818 (2012).
Rabosky, D. L. et al. Rates of speciation and morphological evolution are correlated across the largest vertebrate radiation. Nat. Commun. 4, 1958 (2013).
Gomes, A. C. R., Sorenson, M. D. & Cardoso, G. C. Speciation is associated with changing ornamentation rather than stronger sexual selection. Evolution 70, 2823–2838 (2016).
Ricklefs, R. E. Cladogenesis and morphological diversification in passerine birds. Nature 430, 338–341 (2004).
Title, P. O. & Burns, K. J. Rates of climatic niche evolution are correlated with species richness in a large and ecologically diverse radiation of songbirds. Ecol. Lett. 18, 433–440 (2015).
Cooney, C. R., Seddon, N. & Tobias, J. A. Widespread correlations between climatic niche evolution and species diversification in birds. J. Anim. Ecol. 85, 869–878 (2016).
Cardoso, G. C. & Mota, P. G. Speciational evolution of coloration in the genus Carduelis. Evolution 62, 753–762 (2008).
Mason, N. A. et al. Song evolution, speciation, and vocal learning in passerine birds. Evolution 71, 786–796 (2017).
Igea, J., Miller, E. F., Papadopulos, A. S. T. & Tanentzap, A. J. Seed size and its rate of evolution correlate with species diversification across angiosperms. PLoS Biol. 15, e2002792 (2017).
Puttick, M. N., Clark, J. & Donoghue, P. C. J. Size is not everything: rates of genome size evolution, not C-value, correlate with speciation in angiosperms. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 282, 20152289 (2015).
Cantalapiedra, J. L., Prado, J. L., Hernandez Fernández, M. & Alberdi, M. T. Decoupled ecomorphological evolution and diversification in Neogene–Quaternary horses. Science 355, 627–630 (2017).
Lee, M. S. Y., Sanders, K. L., King, B. & Palci, A. Diversification rates and phenotypic evolution in venomous snakes (Elapidae). R. Soc. Open Sci. 3, 150277 (2016).
Monroe, M. J. & Bokma, F. Do speciation rates drive rates of body size evolution in mammals? Am. Nat. 174, 912–918 (2009).
Crouch, N. M. A. & Ricklefs, R. E. Speciation rate is independent of the rate of evolution of morphological size, shape, and absolute morphological specialization in a large clade of birds. Am. Nat. 193, E78–E91 (2019).
Cooper, N., Thomas, G. H., Venditti, C., Meade, A. & Freckleton, R. P. A cautionary note on the use of Ornstein Uhlenbeck models in macroevolutionary studies. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 118, 64–77 (2016).
Silvestro, D., Kostikova, A., Litsios, G., Pearman, P. B. & Salamin, N. Measurement errors should always be incorporated in phylogenetic comparative analysis. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 340–346 (2015).
Ho, L. S. T. & Ané, C. Intrinsic inference difficulties for trait evolution with Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 1133–1146 (2014).
Pennell, M. W., Harmon, L. J. & Uyeda, J. C. Is there room for punctuated equilibrium in macroevolution? Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 23–32 (2014).
Rabosky, D. L. Automatic detection of key innovations, rate shifts, and diversity-dependence on phylogenetic trees. PLoS ONE 9, e89543 (2014).
Elliot, M. G. & Mooers, A. Ø. Inferring ancestral states without assuming neutrality or gradualism using a stable model of continuous character evolution. BMC Evol. Biol. 14, 226 (2014).
Smaers, J. B., Mongle, C. S. & Kandler, A. A multiple variance Brownian motion framework for estimating variable rates and inferring ancestral states. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 118, 78–94 (2016).
Pagel, M. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401, 877–884 (1999).
Rabosky, D. L. Positive correlation between diversification rates and phenotypic evolvability can mimic punctuated equilibrium on molecular phylogenies. Evolution 66, 2622–2627 (2012).
Simpson, E. H. The interpretation of interaction in contingency tables. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 13, 238–241 (1951).
Pearl, J. Comment: understanding Simpson’s paradox. Am. Stat. 68, 8–13 (2014).
Romanuk, T. N., Hayward, A. & Hutchings, J. A. Trophic level scales positively with body size in fishes. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 20, 231–240 (2011).
Steele, S. E. & López-Fernández, H. Body size diversity and frequency distributions of Neotropical cichlid fishes (Cichliformes: Cichlidae: Cichlinae). PLoS ONE 9, e106336 (2014).
Murillo-García, O. & De la vega, M. Divergence, convergence and phenotypic diversity of neotropical frugivorous bats. Diversity 10, 100 (2018).
Morales, A. E., Ruedi, M., Field, K. & Carstens, B. C. Diversification rates have no effect on the convergent evolution of foraging strategies in the most speciose genus of bats, Myotis. Evolution. 73, 2263–2280 (2019).
Rodríguez-Robles, J. A. Molecular systematics of New World lampropeltinine snakes (Colubridae): implications for biogeography and evolution of food habits. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 68, 355–385 (1999).
Weir, J. T. & Mursleen, S. Diversity-dependent cladogenesis and trait evolution in the adaptive radiation of the auks (Aves: Alcidae). Evolution 67, 403–416 (2013).
Moen, D. S., Irschick, D. J. & Wiens, J. J. Evolutionary conservatism and convergence both lead to striking similarity in ecology, morphology and performance across continents in frogs. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 280, 20132156 (2013).
Ahmadzadeh, F. et al. Cryptic speciation patterns in Iranian rock lizards uncovered by integrative taxonomy. PloS ONE 8, e80563 (2013).
Gabirot, M., Lopez, P. & Martin, J. Differences in chemical sexual signals may promote reproductive isolation and cryptic speciation between Iberian wall lizard populations. Int. J. Evol. Biol. 2012, 698520 (2012).
Hipsley, C. A., Miles, D. B. & Müller, J. Morphological disparity opposes latitudinal diversity gradient in lacertid lizards. Biol. Lett. 10, 20140101 (2014).
Louca, S. & Pennell, M. W. Extant timetrees are consistent with a myriad of diversification histories. Nature 580, 502–505 (2020).
Liow, L. H., Quental, T. B. & Marshall, C. R. When can decreasing diversification rates be detected with molecular phylogenies and the fossil record? Syst. Biol. 59, 646–659 (2010).
Brown, J. H. Macroecology (Univ. Chicago Press, 1995).
Schluter, D. Ecology and the origin of species. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16, 372–380 (2001).
Arnegard, M. E. et al. Sexual signal evolution outpaces ecological divergence during electric fish species radiation. Am. Nat. 176, 335–356 (2010).
Cooney, C. R. et al. Sexual selection predicts the rate and direction of colour divergence in a large avian radiation. Nat. Commun. 10, 1773 (2019).
Rabosky, D. L. Reproductive isolation and the causes of speciation rate variation in nature. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 118, 13–25 (2016).
Henao Diaz, L. F., Harmon, L. J., Sugawara, M. T. C., Miller, E. T. & Pennell, M. W. Macroevolutionary diversification rates show time dependency. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 7403–7408 (2019).
Shafir, A., Azouri, D., Goldberg, E. E. & Mayrose, I. Heterogeneity in the rate of molecular sequence evolution substantially impacts the accuracy of detecting shifts in diversification rates. Evolution 74, 1620–1639 (2020).
Losos, J. B. Adaptive radiation, ecological opportunity, and evolutionary determinism. Am. Nat. 175, 623–639 (2010).
Price, T. Sexual selection and natural selection in bird speciation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 353, 251–260 (1998).
Salisbury, C. L., Seddon, N., Cooney, C. R. & Tobias, J. A. The latitudinal gradient in dispersal constraints: ecological specialisation drives diversification in tropical birds. Ecol. Lett. 15, 847–855 (2012).
Moyle, R. G., Filardi, C. E., Smith, C. E. & Diamond, J. Explosive Pleistocene diversification and hemispheric expansion of a “great speciator”. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 1863–1868 (2009).
Title, P. O. & Rabosky, D. L. Tip rates, phylogenies and diversification: what are we estimating, and how good are the estimates? Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 821–834 (2019).
Freckleton, R. P., Phillimore, A. B. & Pagel, M. Relating traits to diversification: a simple test. Am. Nat. 172, 102–115 (2008).
Maliet, O., Hartig, F. & Morlon, H. A model with many small shifts for estimating species-specific diversification rates. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1086–1092 (2019).
Rabosky, D. L. et al. BAMMtools: an R package for the analysis of evolutionary dynamics on phylogenetic trees. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 701–707 (2014).
Chira, A. M. & Thomas, G. H. The impact of rate heterogeneity on inference of phylogenetic models of trait evolution. J. Evol. Biol. 29, 2502–2518 (2016).
Zelditch, M. L., Ye, J., Mitchell, J. S. & Swiderski, D. L. Rare ecomorphological convergence on a complex adaptive landscape: body size and diet mediate evolution of jaw shape in squirrels (Sciuridae). Evolution 71, 633–649 (2017).
Pimiento, C., Cantalapiedra, J. L., Shimada, K., Field, D. J. & Smaers, J. B. Evolutionary pathways toward gigantism in sharks and rays. Evolution 73, 588–599 (2019).
Gómez-Robles, A., Smaers, J. B., Holloway, R. L., Polly, P. D. & Wood, B. A. Brain enlargement and dental reduction were not linked in hominin evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 468–473 (2017).
Chira, A. M. et al. Correlates of rate heterogeneity in avian ecomorphological traits. Ecol. Lett. 21, 1505–1514 (2018).
Morlon, H. et al. RPANDA: an R package for macroevolutionary analyses on phylogenetic trees. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 589–597 (2016).
Pennell, M. W., FitzJohn, R. G., Cornwell, W. K. & Harmon, L. J. Model adequacy and the macroevolution of angiosperm functional traits. Am. Nat. 186, E33–E50 (2015).
Ho, L. S. T. & Ané, C. A linear-time algorithm for Gaussian and non-Gaussian trait evolution models. Syst. Biol. 63, 397–408 (2014).
Harvey, M. G. & Rabosky, D. L. Continuous traits and speciation rates: alternatives to state-dependent diversification models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 984–993 (2018).
Rabosky, D. L. No substitute for real data: a cautionary note on the use of phylogenies from birth–death polytomy resolvers for downstream comparative analyses. Evolution 69, 3207–3216 (2015).
Jetz, W. & Pyron, R. A. The interplay of past diversification and evolutionary isolation with present imperilment across the amphibian tree of life. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 850–858 (2018).
Faurby, S. et al. PHYLACINE 1.2: the phylogenetic atlas of mammal macroecology. Ecology 99, 2626 (2018).
Tonini, J. F. R., Beard, K. H., Ferreira, R. B., Jetz, W. & Pyron, R. A. Fully-sampled phylogenies of squamates reveal evolutionary patterns in threat status. Biol. Conserv. 204, 23–31 (2016).
Schliep, K. P. phangorn: phylogenetic analysis in R. Bioinformatics 27, 592–593 (2011).
Wilman, H. et al. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world’s birds and mammals. Ecology 95, 2027 (2014).
Oliveira, B. F., São-Pedro, V. A., Santos-Barrera, G., Penone, C. & Costa, G. C. AmphiBIO, a global database for amphibian ecological traits. Sci. Data 4, 170123 (2017).
Amado, T. F., Bidau, C. J. & Olalla-Tárraga, M. Á. Geographic variation of body size in New World anurans: energy and water in a balance. Ecography 42, 456–466 (2018).
Froese, R. & Pauly, D. FishBase (accessed 27 February 2019); www.fishbase.org
Feldman, A., Sabath, N., Pyron, R. A., Mayrose, I. & Meiri, S. Body sizes and diversification rates of lizards, snakes, amphisbaenians and the tuatara. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 25, 187–197 (2016).
Hadfield, J. D. MCMC methods for multi-response generalised linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1–22 (2010).
Acknowledgements
We thank J. Brown, A. Chira, Y. He, E. Hughes and J. Kennedy for helpful discussion, and M. Pennell and D. Rabosky for constructive comments on the manuscript. This work was funded by the European Research Council (grant no. 615709 Project ‘ToLERates’), and by a Leverhulme Early Career Fellowship to C.R.C. (ECF-2018-101) and a Royal Society University Research Fellowship to G.H.T. (UF120016 and URF\R\180006).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
C.R.C. and G.H.T conceived and designed the research. C.R.C. collected data and conducted the analyses. C.R.C. and G.H.T. wrote the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data
Extended Data Fig. 1 The performance of different phylogenetic approaches for estimating rates of speciation (λ) and trait evolution (σ2).
Plots show the error, bias and correlation of estimated rates of speciation a, and trait evolution (b-c) compared to true (that is simulated) values. In b, results are based on comparing rates across all branches of the tree, whereas in c, results are based on comparing tip rates only. Results are based on fitting models to 100 simulated tree and trait datasets, each with 250 tips. Boxplots show the median value (thick line) and 0.25-0.75 (box) and 0.05-0.95 (whiskers) quantile ranges. BT, BayesTraits; ST, StableTraits.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Comparison of the performance of different approaches for testing correlations between rates of speciation and trait evolution.
Results are based on simulated datasets of 250-tip trees (n = 100) assuming strong correlations between rates (columns 1 and 2), with speciation rates estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and trait rates also estimated using BAMM (σ2BAMM). See Methods for details of the simulation procedure, rate metrics and significance tests used. The grey shaded area indicates false discovery (Type I error) rates of <5%.
Extended Data Fig. 3 Comparison of mean standardised effect sizes derived from the ‘simulation + rescale’ approach using alternate rate metrics.
Speciation rates are estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and trait rates are estimated using either BayesTraits (σ2BT) or BAMM (σ2BAMM). Results are based on applying the ‘tree-transformation + simulation’ method to datasets of 250-tip trees (n = 100) generated assuming strong correlations between rates (columns 1 and 2).
Extended Data Fig. 4 Comparison of the performance of the ‘simulation + rescale’ approach with varying tree size and simulated correlation strength.
Results are based on simulated datasets of 100 trees, with speciation rates estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and trait rates estimated using BayesTraits (σ2BT). For the scenarios involving correlated rates, solid and dashed lines correspond to strong (r = ±1) and weaker (r = ± 0.5) simulated correlation strengths, respectively. (Note: realised correlation strengths associated with these scenarios are lower than implied by the generating values; see Extended Data Fig. 10). The grey shaded area indicates false discovery (Type I error) rates of <5%. ME, measurement error.
Extended Data Fig. 5 Comparison of the performance of the ‘simulation + rescale’ approach with decreasing sampling proportions.
Results are based on simulated datasets of 250-tip trees (n = 100) assuming strong correlations between rates (columns 1 and 2), with speciation rates estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and trait rates estimated using BayesTraits (σ2BT). The grey shaded area indicates false discovery (Type I error) rates of <5%. ME, measurement error.
Extended Data Fig. 6 Comparison of the performance of the ‘simulation + rescale’ approach with increasing relative extinction (turnover) rates.
Results are based on simulated datasets of 250-tip trees (n = 100) assuming strong correlations between rates (columns 1 and 2), with speciation rates estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and trait rates estimated using BayesTraits (σ2BT). The grey shaded area indicates false discovery (Type I error) rates of <5%. ME, measurement error.
Extended Data Fig. 7 Results for tests of the relationship between rates of speciation and body size evolution within five vertebrate taxa.
Results are based on speciation rates estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and body size rates estimated using BayesTraits (σ2BT). N = total species richness; Nsamp = number of species sampled in rate analyses; phy. sig. = body size phylogenetic signal (Pagel’s lambda); ρobs = observed correlation coefficient (Spearman’s ρ); ρnull = null correlation coefficients derived from null simulations (n = 200); SES = standardised effect size.
Extended Data Fig. 8 Relationships between rates of speciation and body size evolution in vertebrate subclades.
Plots show the relationship between log-transformed tip rates of speciation (λBAMM) and body size evolution (σ2BT) in each clade. Colours reflect the five vertebrate groups (birds = blue, mammals = red, amphibians = green, squamates = purple, fish = orange). Inset numbers give the mean effect size for each relationship, with significant (P < 0.05) associations marked with an asterisk and highlighted in bold.
Extended Data Fig. 9 Multipredictor models of effect sizes measuring the strength of the association between rates of speciation and body size evolution in vertebrate subclades.
Results are based on speciation rates estimated using BAMM (λBAMM) and trait rates estimated using BayesTraits (σ2BT). All predictor variables were standardised (mean = 0, sd = 1) prior to analysis. SE = standard error. *, PMCMC < 0.05.
Extended Data Fig. 10 Mean (sd) correlation coefficients (Pearson’s r) for the realised relationship between simulated rates of speciation and trait evolution.
Realised rates of trait evolution are inferred by calculating the squared-trait distance between known simulated ancestral and descendent nodes in the tree, divided by phylogenetic branch length (that is time). Note: Pearson’s r values in the table header refer to the correlation strength between speciation and trait rates used in the stochastic model used to generate trait values. n = 100 trees in each case.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Data
Supplementary Data 1 (taxonomy and body size measurements) and 2 (subclade data and effect sizes).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cooney, C.R., Thomas, G.H. Heterogeneous relationships between rates of speciation and body size evolution across vertebrate clades. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 101–110 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01321-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01321-y
This article is cited by
-
Species delimitation of tea plants (Camellia sect. Thea) based on super-barcodes
BMC Plant Biology (2024)
-
Exciting times for evolutionary biology
Nature Ecology & Evolution (2024)
-
The radiation continuum and the evolution of frog diversity
Nature Communications (2023)
-
Body size and life history shape the historical biogeography of tetrapods
Nature Ecology & Evolution (2023)
-
Accelerated body size evolution in upland environments is correlated with recent speciation in South American freshwater fishes
Nature Communications (2023)