skip to main content


Title: Approaches to macroevolution: 1. General concepts and origin of variation.
Abstract Approaches to macroevolution require integration of its two fundamental components, i.e. the origin and the sorting of variation, in a hierarchical framework. Macroevolution occurs in multiple currencies that are only loosely correlated, notably taxonomic diversity, morphological disparity, and functional variety. The origin of variation within this conceptual framework is increasingly understood in developmental terms, with the semi-hierarchical structure of gene regulatory networks (GRNs, used here in a broad sense incorporating not just the genetic circuitry per se but the factors controlling the timing and location of gene expression and repression), the non-linear relation between magnitude of genetic change and the phenotypic results, the evolutionary potential of co-opting existing GRNs, and developmental responsiveness to nongenetic signals (i.e. epigenetics and plasticity), all requiring modification of standard microevolutionary models, and rendering difficult any simple definition of evolutionary novelty. The developmental factors underlying macroevolution create anisotropic probabilities—i.e., an uneven density distribution—of evolutionary change around any given phenotypic starting point, and the potential for coordinated changes among traits that can accommodate change via epigenetic mechanisms. From this standpoint, “punctuated equilibrium” and “phyletic gradualism” simply represent two cells in a matrix of evolutionary models of phenotypic change, and the origin of trends and evolutionary novelty are not simply functions of ecological opportunity. Over long timescales, contingency becomes especiallyimportant, and can be viewed in terms of macroevolutionary lags (the temporal separation between the origin of a trait or clade and subsequent diversification); such lags can arise by several mechanisms: as geological or phylogenetic artifacts, or when diversifications require synergistic interactions among traits, or between traits and external events. The temporal and spatial patterns of the origins of evolutionary novelties are a challenge to macroevolutionary theory; individual events can be described retrospectively, but a general model relating development, genetics, and ecology is needed. An accompanying paper (Jablonski in Evol Biol 2017) reviews diversity dynamics and the sorting of variation, with some general conclusions.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1633535
NSF-PAR ID:
10077203
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Evolutionary biology
Volume:
44
ISSN:
0071-3260
Page Range / eLocation ID:
427 - 450
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract Approaches to macroevolution require integration of its two fundamental components, within a hierarchical framework. Following a companion paper on the origin of variation, I here discuss sorting within an evolutionary hierarchy. Species sorting—sometimes termed species selection in the broad sense, meaning differential origination and extinction owing to intrinsic biological properties—can be split into strict-sense species selection, in which rate differentials are governed by emergent, species-level traits such as geographic range size, and effect macroevolution, in which rates are governed by organism-level traits such as body size; both processes can create hitchhiking effects, indirectly causing the proliferation or decline of other traits. Several methods can operationalize the concept of emergence, so that rigorous separation of these processes is increasingly feasible. A macroevolutionary tradeoff, underlain by the intrinsic traits that influence evolutionary dynamics, causes speciation and extinction rates to covary in many clades, resulting in evolutionary volatility of some clades and more subdued behavior of others; the few clades that break the tradeoff can achieve especially prolific diversification. In addition to intrinsic biological traits at multiple levels, extrinsic events can drive the waxing and waning of clades, and the interaction of traits and events are difficult but important to disentangle. Evolutionary trends can arise in many ways, and at any hierarchical level; descriptive models can be fitted to clade trajectories in phenotypic or functional spaces, but they may not be diagnostic regarding processes, and close attention must be paid to both leading and trailingedges of apparent trends. Biotic interactions can have negative or positive effects on taxonomic diversity within a clade, but cannot be readily extrapolated from the nature of such interactions at the organismic level. The relationships among macroevolutionary currencies through time (taxonomic richness, morphologic disparity, functional variety) are crucial for understanding the nature of evolutionary diversification. A novel approach to diversity-disparity analysis shows that taxonomic diversifications can lag behind, occur in concert with, or precede, increases in disparity. Some overarching issues relating to both the origin and sorting of clades and phenotypes include the macroevolutionary role of mass extinctions, the potential differences between plant and animal macroevolution, whether macroevolutionary processes have changed through geologic time, and the growing human impact on present-day macroevolution. Many challenges remain, but progress is being made on two of the key ones: (a) the integration of variation-generating mechanisms and the multilevel sorting processes that act on that variation, and (b) the integration of paleontological and neontological approaches to historical biology. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    A fuller understanding of the role of developmental bias in shaping large‐scale evolutionary patterns requires integrating bias (the probability distribution of variation accessible to an ancestral phenotype) with clade dynamics (the differential survival and production of species and evolutionary lineages). This synthesis could proceed as a two‐way exchange between the developmental data available to neontologists and the strictly phenotypic but richly historical and dynamic data available to paleontologists. Analyses starting in extant populations could aim to predict macroevolution in the fossil record from observed developmental bias, while analyses starting in the fossil record, particularly the record of extant species and lineages, could aim to predict developmental bias from macroevolutionary patterns, including the broad range of extinct phenotypes. Analyses in multivariate morphospaces are especially effective when coupled with phylogeny, theoretical and developmental models, and diversity–disparity plots. This research program will also require assessing the “heritability” of an ancestral bias across phylogeny, and the tendency for bias change in strength and orientation over evolutionary time. Such analyses will help find a set of general rules for the macroevolutionary effects of developmental bias, including its impact on and interactions with the other intrinsic and extrinsic factors governing the movement, expansion, and contraction of clades in morphospace.

     
    more » « less
  3. A central challenge for biology is to reveal how different levels of biological variation interact and shape diversity. However, recent experimental studies have indicated that prevailing models of evolution cannot readily explain the link between micro- and macroevolution at deep timescales. Here, we suggest that this paradox could be the result of a common mechanism driving a correlated pattern of evolution. We examine the proportionality between genetic variance and patterns of trait evolution in a system whose developmental processes are well understood to gain insight into how such alignment between morphological divergence and genetic variation might be maintained over macroevolutionary time. Primate molars present a model system by which to link developmental processes to evolutionary dynamics because of the biased pattern of variation that results from the developmental architecture regulating their formation. We consider how this biased variation is expressed at the population level, and how it manifests through evolution across primates. There is a strong correspondence between the macroevolutionary rates of primate molar divergence and their genetic variation. This suggests a model of evolution in which selection is closely aligned with the direction of genetic variance, phenotypic variance, and the underlying developmental architecture of anatomical traits. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract

    Abstract.—Testing adaptive hypotheses about how continuous traits evolve in association with developmentally structured discrete traits, while accounting for the confounding influence of other, hidden, evolutionary forces, remains a challenge in evolutionary biology. For example, geophytes are herbaceous plants—with underground buds—that use underground storage organs (USOs) to survive extended periods of unfavorable conditions. Such plants have evolved multiple times independently across all major vascular plant lineages. Even within closely related lineages, however, geophytes show impressive variation in the morphological modifications and structures (i.e.,“types” of USOs) that allow them to survive underground. Despite the developmental and structural complexity of USOs, the prevailing hypothesis is that they represent convergent evolutionary “solutions” to a common ecological problem, though some recent research has drawn this conclusion into question. We extend existing phylogenetic comparative methods to test for links between the hierarchical discrete morphological traits associated with USOs and adaptation to environmental variables, using a phylogeny of 621 species in Liliales. We found that plants with different USO types do not differ in climatic niche more than expected by chance, with the exception of root morphology, where modified roots are associated with lower temperature seasonality. These findings suggest that root tubers may reflect adaptations to different climatic conditions than those represented by other types of USOs. Thus, the tissue type and developmental origin of the USO structure may influence the way it mediates ecological relationships, which draws into question the appropriateness of ascribing broad ecological patterns uniformly across geophytic taxa. This work provides a new framework for testing adaptive hypotheses and for linking ecological patterns across morphologically varying taxa while accounting for developmental (non-independent) relationships in morphological data. [Climatic niche evolution; geophytes; imperfect correspondence; macroevolution.].

     
    more » « less
  5. Abstract

    The origin of novel complex traits constitutes a central yet largely unresolved challenge in evolutionary biology. Intriguingly, many of the most promising breakthroughs in understanding the genesis of evolutionary novelty in recent years have occurred not in evolutionary biology itself, but through the comparative study of development and, more recently, the interface of developmental biology and ecology. Here, I discuss how these insights are changing our understanding of what matters in the origin of novel, complex traits in ontogeny and evolution. Specifically, my essay has two major objectives. First, I discuss how the nature of developmental systems biases the production of phenotypic variation in the face of novel or stressful environments toward functional, integrated and, possibly, adaptive variants. This, in turn, allows the production of novel phenotypes to precede (rather than follow) changes in genotype and allows developmental processes that are the product of past evolution to shape evolutionary change that has yet to occur. Second, I explore how this nature of developmental systems has itself evolved over time, increasing the repertoire of ontogenies to pursue a wider range of objectives across an expanding range of conditions, thereby creating an increasingly extensive affordance landscape in development and developmental evolution. Developmental systems and their evolution can thus be viewed as dynamic processes that modify their own means across ontogeny and phylogeny. The study of these dynamics necessitates more than the strict reductionist approach that currently dominates the fields of developmental and evolutionary developmental biology.

     
    more » « less