[Taxacom] Fwd: Yoder, dispersal, and Madagascar's biota

Ken Kinman kinman at hotmail.com
Tue Mar 25 14:27:09 CDT 2014 

Hi John,                                                                        Yes, we can definitely agree that Dougherty was wrong about a transoceanic dispersal of primitive frogs.  But that is because Ascaphidae and Leiopelmatidae are not sister groups (their shared characteristics are symplesiomorphies, not synapomorphies).  And hopefully you no longer have a "track" connecting them across the Pacific, because that would also be very misleading.  Unfortunately, the "Tree of Life" still seems to show them as sister groups, but it is terribly out of date.
                           -----------------Ken Kinman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 06:38:37 +1300
> From: calabar.john at gmail.com
> To: phovenkamp at casema.nl
> CC: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Fwd: Yoder, dispersal, and Madagascar's biota
> 
> Peter,
> 
> Not sure if I ever remember exactly what I said yesterday. I think the key
> point is that chance dispersal does not  anticipate vicariant relationships
> or spatial correlations with tectonics which would not occur if chance
> dispersal was the driving force in evolutionary differentiation. Yes one
> might appeal to chance to explain the iguana or frog, but it is not
> necessary.
> 
> Yes we might agree that its hard to believe, but some do believe. Years ago
> the herpetologist Dr. Charles Dougherty gave a presentation at Victoria
> University of Wellington where he said a molecular clock estimated
> divergence between the NZ frog and its N American relative at 20 Ma so the
> NZ frog rafted from North America (somehow not the other way). So he was
> willing to believe.
> 
> John Grehan
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Phovenkamp at casema Nl
> <phovenkamp at casema.nl>wrote:
> 
> >  John,
> >
> > I remember repeated assertions (by you, Michael Heads, or even the three
> > of you with Robin Craw) that long-distance dispersal is a process that does
> > not generate patterns (I even remember having made that assertion myself a
> > few times, so I must be excused in taking it seriously).
> >
> > But the consequence of that assertion is that lack of a general pattern
> > cannot be cited as a problem for a dispersalist explanation. It's a
> > relatively simple argument: common causes: repeated patterns;
> > long-distance dispersal: haphazard patterns.
> >
> > The erratic route along which the frog rafted across the Pacific,
> > bypassing Fiji and Samoa, is thus exactly what one would expect when LDD is
> > playing a role.
> >
> > Personally, I find it as hard as you do to believe in frogs sitting on
> > rafts and somehow surviving a journey across the Pacific without either
> > dying form starvation, extreme sunburn or simply no longer being able to
> > withstand the urge to jump, but that it has missed a small speck at the
> > horizon, I can understand that.
> >
> >
> > Peter Hovenkamp
> >
> > Op 25 maart 2014 om 11:42 schreef John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>:
> >
> >
> >
> > I would add to Mike's point "you have to explain that in a way that fits
> > with the rest of the pattern." as time and time again dispersal
> > explanations that seem to provide a tidy explanation for one instance
> > generate a string of contradictory anomalies that are somehow never
> > addressed (and perhaps not even recognized since there is no need in
> > dispersal biogeography to examine, let alone look for patterns). The
> > primitive NZ frog is supposed to have rafted cross the Pacific from the
> > northern Rockies but did not make it to Fiji or Samoa or anywhere else
> > while iguanas are supposed to have made the trip to Fiji and Samoa but not
> > to NZ or anywhere else etc, etc.
> >
> >
> > John Grehan
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Michael Heads <m.j.heads at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ken,
> > >
> > > You said about Yoder's study: 'I thought it was a very thoughtful and
> > > balanced review, and how Michael dismisses the included studies as ONLY
> > > showing the importance of calibration method has me scratching my head in
> > > disbelief'.
> > >
> > > All the studies (except one) used one calibration method (fossils) and
> > > inferred the same process (dispersal). The only other paper used a very
> > > different calibration method (tectonics) and inferred a totally different
> > > result (vicariance). The only obvious conclusion is that calibration is
> > > crucial and that there are unresolved issues.
> > >
> > > Looking at it in more detail, neither the reviewed papers nor the review
> > > itself addressed the problem of the 'priors' used in dating analyses. In
> > > other words, how much older than the oldest fossil can its clade be?
> > >
> > > The Yoder work on Madagascar is discussed in more length elsewhere in my
> > > 2012 book. I also discussed the Ali and Huber work you mentioned: 'The
> > Ali
> > > and Huber paper solved the "problem" of ocean currents...'. I think you
> > > should read my book! A&H explained how lemurs might have been stranded in
> > > Madagascar by rafting, but this is only part of the Madagascar puzzle.
> > > Strepsirrhines are in Africa and Madagascar (lemurs), but not
> > > America, while haplorhines are in Africa and America, but not Madagascar.
> > > This is a very symmetrical structure. If strepsirrhines could raft to
> > > Madagascar, why did not haplorhines? And why could haplorrhines manage to
> > > raft to America when they couldn't even get to Madagascar? A&H didn't
> > > address these aspects. You can't just answer one part of the problem -
> > > anyone can think up an ad hoc reason for one particular step. In
> > addition,
> > > haplorhines are more diverse in western Africa, strepsirrhines in east
> > > Africa - you have to explain that in a way that fits with the rest of the
> > > pattern.
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:45 AM, Ken Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Michael and John,
> > > >
> > > > Well, the funny thing is that I was inclined to give you the
> > > benefit
> > > > of the doubt on cichlids (as was Yoder and Nowak), but I am now
> > actually
> > > > less inclined to do so. I would like to emphasize the last two
> > > sentences
> > > > of Yoder and Nowak's abstract: "For those studies that include
> > > > divergence time analysis, we find an overwhelming indication of
> > Cenozoic
> > > > origins for most Malagasy clades. We conclude that most of the
> > > present-day
> > > > biota of Madagascar is comprised of the descendents of Cenozoic
> > > dispersers,
> > > > predominantly with African origins." I think that their use of the word
> > > > "overwhelming" is important to note, and I found no reason to think
> > that
> > > > they were exaggerating in doing so. As for the cichlids in particular,
> > > > in the text they admit that among the vertebrates, "the cichlid fishes
> > of
> > > Madagascar
> > > > represent the most challenging puzzle for differentiating vicariance
> > > from dispersal."
> > > > And then they are careful to give the arguments either way. I thought
> > > it
> > > > was a very thoughtful and balanced review, and how Michael dismisses
> > the
> > > > included studies as ONLY showing the importance of calibration method
> > has
> > > > me scratching my head in disbelief. I think that it is a narrow and
> > > unfair
> > > > assessment of the Yoder and Nowak review and of the studies they were
> > > > reviewing.
> > > >
> > > > It's too bad Michael (in 2012) obviously didn't have the more
> > > > recently published and thorough study on the subject of cichlid
> > > > biogeography, which concluded that it was dispersal, not vicariance,
> > > which
> > > > produced the present distribution of those fishes: Title:
> > > > Molecular and fossil evidence place the origin of cichlid fishes long
> > > > after Gondwanan rifting.
> > > > by Matt Friedman<
> > >
> > http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/search?author1=Matt+Friedman&sortspec=date&submit=Submit
> > > >
> > > > ,
> > > > Benjamin P. Keck<
> > >
> > http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/search?author1=Benjamin+P.+Keck&sortspec=date&submit=Submit
> > >,
> > > et
> > > > al., 2013. They state:
> > > > "It is important to note that our relaxed-molecular-clock analysis
> > > > shares no palaeontological data in common with either our analysis of
> > the
> > > > distribution of cichlid-bearing fossil horizons or our database of
> > > > outgroup-based age constraints. We interpret the convergence of these
> > > three
> > > > semi-independent approaches, which all deliver age estimates for
> > cichlids
> > > > that are within error of one another, as a consequence of genuine
> > > > evolutionary signal that strongly contradicts the time scales for
> > > cichlids
> > > > demanded by hypotheses of Gondwanan vicariance."
> > > >
> > > > And even if one doesn't agree with Friedman et al.'s conclusions,
> > > > the cichlids are just one of many taxa reviewed by Yoder and Nowak, not
> > > > only among vertebrates, but plants and invertebrates as well. Many
> > > appear
> > > > to have dispersed late enough that it stretches credibility to suggest
> > > that
> > > > fossil calibration is a problem with so many of them dispersing (as
> > > opposed
> > > > to a very early vicariance). Especially the rodent and carnivore
> > > dispersal
> > > > between 20 and 25 million years ago (see Ali and Huber, 2010; *Nature*
> > > > *463*, 653-656; Mammalian biodiversity on Madagascar controlled by
> > ocean
> > > > currents). The Ali and Huber paper solved the "problem" of ocean
> > > currents
> > > > presumably going the wrong way for dispersal to occur, showing that the
> > > > currents went the other way in the early-to-mid Tertiary.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------Ken Kinman
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 10:46:58 +1300
> > > > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Madagascar's biota overwhelmingly from Cenozoic
> > > > dispersers
> > > > From: m.j.heads at gmail.com
> > > > To: kinman at hotmail.com; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > >
> > > > Hi Ken,
> > > >
> > > > Here is what I wrote (2012) about Yoder and Nowak's paper:
> > > >
> > > > Yoder and Nowak (2006) gave a thorough review of the molecular clock
> > > > literature on Malagasy taxa. In every study of plants the
> > > fossil-calibrated
> > > > clocks dated the Madagascar clades as younger than 80 Ma and so they
> > were
> > > > all attributed to post-Gondwana dispersal, none to vicariance. With a
> > > > single exception, studies of animal taxa showed the same result. All
> > > > molecular dating studies of Malagasy invertebrates, reptiles and
> > mammals
> > > > have concluded in favor of dispersal, as the inferred
> > (fossil-calibrated)
> > > > divergence times were post-Mesozoic. The only sequenced group in Yoder
> > > and
> > > > Nowak’s review (2006) whose presence on Madagascar has been attributed
> > to
> > > > vicariance is the fish family Cichlidae. Molecular dating studies of
> > this
> > > > group avoided the use of fossil calibrations completely (Sparks, 2004,
> > > > Sparks and Smith, 2004; see Chapter 2). Instead, the vicariant
> > > distribution
> > > > of the two main molecular clades: Madagascar-Africa-South America, and
> > > > Madagascar-India-Sri Lanka, was correlated with tectonics – the opening
> > > of
> > > > the Mozambique Channel – and this was used as a calibration. (The same
> > > > method is used here for primates). So although Yoder and Nowak (2006:
> > > 416)
> > > > concluded that the importance of dispersal ‘cannot be denied’, really
> > the
> > > > only thing the cited studies show is the importance of the calibration
> > > > method.
> > > >
> > > > Michael Heads
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Ken Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Has Vicariance or Dispersal Been the Predominant Biogeographic Force in
> > > > Madagascar? Only Time Will TellAnnual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and
> > > > SystematicsVol. 37: 405-431 DOI:
> > > 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110239by
> > > > Anne D. Yoder and Michael D. Nowak
> > > > Abstract. Madagascar is one of the world's hottest biodiversity hot
> > > > spots due to its diverse, endemic, and highly threatened biota. This
> > > biota
> > > > shows a distinct signature of evolution in isolation, both in the high
> > > > levels of diversity within lineages and in the imbalance of lineages
> > that
> > > > are represented. For example, chameleon diversity is the highest of any
> > > > place on Earth, yet there are no salamanders. These biotic enigmas have
> > > > inspired centuries of speculation relating to the mechanisms by which
> > > > Madagascar's biota came to reside there. The two most probable causal
> > > > factors are Gondwanan vicariance and/or Cenozoic dispersal. By
> > reviewing
> > > a
> > > > comprehensive sample of phylogenetic studies of Malagasy biota, we find
> > > > that the predominant pattern is one of sister group relationships to
> > > > African taxa. For those studies that include divergence time analysis,
> > we
> > > > find an overwhelming indication of Cenozoic origins for most Malagasy
> > > > clades. We conclude that most of the present-day biota of Madagascar is
> > > > comprised of the descendents of Cenozoic dispersers, predominantly with
> > > > African origins.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dunedin, New Zealand.
> > >
> > > My recent books:
> > >
> > > *Molecular panbiogeography of the tropics.* 2012. University of
> > California
> > > Press, Berkeley. www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520271968
> > >
> > > *Biogeography of Australasia: A molecular analysis*. 2014. Cambridge
> > > University Press, Cambridge. www.cambridge.org/9781107041028
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Taxacom Mailing List
> > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> > > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> > >
> > > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.

More information about the Taxacom mailing list