Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T03:57:02.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inferring evolutionary modes in a fossil lineage (Bryozoa: Peronopora) from the Middle and Late Ordovician

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Joseph F. Pachut  and
Robert L. Anstey
Joseph F. Pachut
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Indiana University–Purdue University, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202. E-mail: [email protected]
Robert L. Anstey
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent analytical advances have permitted quantitative evaluations of evolutionary mode in populations of fossil organisms by providing tests of the null hypothesis that patterns of stratigraphic character variation do not differ from the expectations of a random walk. If the hypothesis can be rejected, then stasis and anagenesis represent alternative evolutionary modes discernable using values of the Hurst estimate. We used this approach to evaluate evolutionary mode in the bryozoan genus Peronopora across 34 characters in eight unbranched, cladistically defined, evolutionary sequences. Eight monophyletic crown species and eight paraphyletic (phenetically distinct) metaspecies constitute 16 species-rank taxa within the genus.

In seven of 15 species-rank transitions that had adequate sample sizes, significant character state changes—both phyletic gradualism and punctuated equilibrium—coincided with speciation events 11% of the time and were limited to more derived, crownward, ancestor-descendant pairs. Each of the 34 measured characters exhibited instances of transpecific stasis or anagenesis. Anagenesis of some characters persisted across unbranched lineages over 13 species (i.e., across 12 speciation events), whereas character stasis continued through unbranched lineages in up to 16 species (i.e., persisted unchanged across all 15 speciation events). Transpecific stasis and anagenesis were recognizable in over one-half of the data set, with stasis being approximately twice as common as anagenesis.

Across all character state transitions, approximately one-half reflect stasis, 30% anagenesis, and 20% could not be differentiated from a random walk. Similarly, across species and metaspecies characterized by a single intraspecific mode, stasis was twice as common as anagenesis and three times more common than undifferentiated random walks. The remaining instances of multiple intraspecific evolutionary modes occurred more commonly within metaspecies than within species. This difference might reflect the more frequent presence of unrecognized cryptic species or subspecies within metaspecies of Peronopora. Instantaneous rates of evolution can be estimated both within and between species of Peronopora for characters displaying anagenesis, potentially providing quantitative insights into evolutionary changes within the lineage.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , Spring 2009 , pp. 209 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Anstey, R. L., and Bartley, J. W. 1984. Quantitative stereology: an improved thin section biometry for bryozoans and other colonial organisms. Journal of Paleontology 58:612–625.Google Scholar
Anstey, R. L., and Pachut, J. F. 2004. Cladistic and phenetic recognition of species in the Ordovician bryozoan genus Peronopora . Journal of Paleontology 78:651–674.Google Scholar
Bookstein, F. L., 1987. Random walk and the existence of evolutionary rates. Paleobiology 13:446–464.Google Scholar
Bookstein, F. L., 1988. Random walk and the biometrics of morphological characters. Evolutionary Biology 9:369–398.Google Scholar
Cheetham, A. H. 1986. Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: rates of morphologic change within and across species boundaries. Paleobiology 12:190–202.Google Scholar
Cheetham, A. H. 1987. Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading? Paleobiology 13:286–296.Google Scholar
Donoghue, M. J. 1985. A critique of the biological species concept and recommendations for a phylogenetic alternative. Bryologist 88:172–181.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N., and Gould, S. J. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. Pp. 82–115 in Schopf, T. J. M., ed. Models in paleobiology. Freeman, Cooper, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Feder, J. 1988. Fractals. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., and Eldredge, N. 1977. Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology 3:115–151.Google Scholar
Gauthier, J., Kluge, A., and Rowe, T. 1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics 4:105–209.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. D. 1976. Paleontology and phylogeny: patterns of evolution at the species level in early Tertiary mammals. American Journal of Science 276:1–28.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. D. 1993. Quantification and comparison of evolutionary rates. American Journal of Science 293A:453–478.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. D. 2001. Rates of evolution on the time scale of the evolutionary process. Genetica 112–113:127–144.Google Scholar
Grey, M., Haggart, J. W., and Smith, P. L. 2008. Species discrimination and evolutionary mode of Buchia (Bivalvia: Buchiidae) from Upper Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous strata of Grassy Island, British Columbia, Canada. Palaeontology 51:583–595.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M., and Patzkowsky, M. E. 1996. Sequence stratigraphy and long-term paleoceanographic change in the Middle and Upper Ordovician of the eastern United States. Geological Society of America Special Paper 306:117–129.Google Scholar
Hunt, G. 2006. Fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution: random walks and beyond. Paleobiology 32:578–601.Google Scholar
Hunt, G. 2007. The relative importance of directional change, random walks, and stasis in the evolution of fossil lineages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 104:18404–18408.Google Scholar
Hurst, H. E. 1951. Long-term storage capacity of reservoirs. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers 116:770–808.Google Scholar
Kellogg, D. E. 1975. The role of phyletic change in the evolution of Pseudocubus vema (Radiolaria). Paleobiology 1:359–370.Google Scholar
Kucera, M., and Malmgren, B. A. 1998. Differences between evolution of mean form and evolution of new morphotypes: an example from Late Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera. Paleobiology 24:49–63.Google Scholar
Malmgren, B. A., Berggren, W., and Lohman, G. P. 1983. Evidence for punctuated gradualism in the Late Neogene Globorotalia tumida lineage of planktonic foraminifera. Paleobiology 9:377–389.Google Scholar
Mandelbrot, B. B. 1999. Multifractals and 1/f noise. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Marshall, C. R. 1995. Stratigraphy, the true order of species originations and extinctions, and testing ancestor-descendant hypotheses among Caribbean Neogene bryozoans. Pp. 208–235 in Erwin, D. H. and Anstey, R. L., eds. New approaches to speciation in the fossil record. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Norell, M. A., and Novacek, M. J. 1992. Congruence between superpositional and phylogenetic patterns: comparing cladistic patterns with fossil records. Cladistics 8:319–337.Google Scholar
Ozawa, T. 1975. Evolution of Lepidolina multiseptata (Permian foraminifer) in East Asia. Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Kyushu University, ser. D, Geology 23:117–164.Google Scholar
Pachut, J. F., and Anstey, R. L. 2002. Phylogeny, systematics, and biostratigraphy of the Ordovician bryozoan genus Peronopora . Journal of Paleontology 76:607–617.Google Scholar
Pachut, J. F., and Anstey, R. L. 2007. Inferring evolutionary order and durations using both stratigraphy and cladistics in a fossil lineage (Bryozoa: Peronopora). Palaios 22:476–488.Google Scholar
Pagel, M., Venditti, C., and Meade, A. 2006. Large punctuational contribution of speciation to evolutionary divergence at the molecular level. Science 314:119–121.Google Scholar
Plotnick, R. E., and Prestegaard, K. L. 1995. Time series analysis. I. Nonlinear dynamics and fractals. In Middleton, G. V., Plotnick, R. E., and Rubin, D. M., eds. New numerical techniques for sedimentary data. SEPM Short Course 36:47–67.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M., Gould, S. J., Schopf, T. J. M., and Simberloff, D. S. 1973. Stochastic models of phylogeny and the evolution of diversity. Journal of Geology 81:525–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roopnarine, P. D. 2001. The description and classification of evolutionary mode: a computational approach. Paleobiology 27:446–465.Google Scholar
Roopnarine, P. D. 2003. Analysis of rates of morphologic evolution. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34:605–632.Google Scholar
Roopnarine, P. D., Byars, G., and Fitzgerald, P. 1999. Anagenetic evolution, stratophenetic patterns, and random walk models. Paleobiology 25:41–57.Google Scholar
Roopnarine, P. D., Murphy, M. A., and Buening, N. 2004. Microevolutionary dynamics of the Early Devonian conodont Wurmiella from the Great basin of Nevada. Palaeontologia Electronica 8(2):1–16. http://papaeo-electronica.org/paleo/2005_2/dynamics/issue2_05.htm Google Scholar
Schroeder, M. 1991. Fractals, chaos, power laws. W. H. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
Sidor, C. A., and Hopson, J. A. 1998. Ghost lineages and “mammalness”: assessing the temporal pattern of character acquisition in the Synapsida. Paleobiology 24:254–273.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1944. Tempo and mode in evolution. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 1994. Systematics and the fossil record: documenting evolutionary patterns. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.Google Scholar
Sweet, W. 1984. Graphic correlation of upper Middle and Upper Ordovician rocks, North American Midcontinent Province, U. S. A. Pp. 22–36 in Bruton, D. L., ed. Aspects of the Ordovician System. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo, p. 23–36.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 2000. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (* and other methods), Version 4. b4a. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass. Google Scholar
SYSTAT® 11. 2004. SPSS Software, Richmond, Calif. Google Scholar
Wickström, L. M., and Donoghue, P. C. J. 2005. Cladograms, phylogenies and the veracity of the conodont fossil record. Special Papers in Palaeontology 73:185–218.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Pachut and Anstey supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Download Pachut and Anstey supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 32.9 KB