Abstract
The dynamics of species diversification have attracted significant scientific attention in recent decades. Many lineages tend to maintain their niche characteristics over evolutionary time, a phenomenon known as phylogenetic niche conservatism (NC), which can slow the processes of ecological speciation by diversification selection. NC can, however, promote speciation through neutral evolution, favoring the geographic isolation of populations. Among the mega-diverse Rodentia group, the low species richness of the family Caviidae stands out. Here, we analyzed if the processes of climatic NC are related to the slow diversification observed in the Caviidae family. Locality data for 13 species and nine climatic variables were used to generate ecological niche models. Niche similarity was quantified using the Schoener D index and used to examine correlations between the times of species divergence and niche similarities, thus characterizing their niche occupation profiles (NOP). The NOP were subsequently used to perform phylogenetic niche reconstructions for these species. Niche models accurately described known distributions of species. The greatest niche overlap documented was between Kerodon rupestris and Galea spixii (0.86). The niche and species divergence times showed a negative correlation (beta = -0.013; p = 0.01). These results support the existence of NC, with phylogenetically closer species occupying similar niches, and emphasize the importance of NC in diversification processes at continental scales in a slowly diversifying group.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
John Haldane was once asked by theologists what his studies in science could indicate about the nature of God, and he responded that the Creator showed “An inordinate fondness for beetles” (Hutchinson 1959), reflecting the wide disparity of species richness found across the tree of life. The balance between speciation and extinction processes are key to determine the number of species found in each lineage over evolutionary time (Glor 2010). Extrinsic processes can promote increases in speciation rates. Evolutionary radiation, for example, can be driven by diverse processes such as climate change (Schluter 2000; Chaboureau et al. 2014), competitor group extinctions (Silvestro et al. 2015), continental geomorphological changes (Zurano et al. 2017), and sea level alterations (Ruzzante et al. 2008). A high number of species can also emerge among some lineages as a response to low diversification in sister groups. The processes that can lead to decreases in speciation rates can be associated with resource environmental constraints or with niche saturation by a given lineage soon after an adaptive radiation event (McPeek 2008; Pyron and Burbrink 2013). Furthermore, some events like the rise of sea level, impact of asteroids on Earth, or paleoclimatic changes (Milankovith cycles) may increase extinction rates, which leads to low net diversification of the affected lineages (Vrba 1992; Alroy 2008; Faith and Behrensmeyer 2013).
A central point for understanding diversification rate dynamics requires examining the mechanisms that act in the formation of new species. The geographic isolation of a population can restrict genetic flow between individuals (de Queiroz 1998) and thus favor speciation. Speciation through the accumulation of neutral mutations is relatively frequent, albeit a very slow process (Wolf et al. 2010), that mainly occurs through reproductive isolation driven by population fragmentation due to geographic and/or climatic barriers (Wiley 1988). Speciation processes can also be driven by deterministic processes such as disruptive selection (ecological speciation), without the existence of vicariant barriers, with reproductive isolation being favored in that case by ecological niche differentiation (Rundle and Nosil 2005). That accumulation of differences can cause rapid isolation between individuals and impact genetic flux between them, thus resulting in strong ecological divergence even between phylogenetically closely related species (Pyron et al. 2015).
It is widely accepted that the climatic (Grinnellian) niches of species can have central roles in ecological speciation at broad geographic scales (Soberón 2007; Thomas 2010; Zurano et al. 2017; Reis et al. 2018). When selection acts as a promoter of speciation it would be expected that closely related species would show strong niche divergences over relatively short intervals of time (Rundle and Nosil 2005; Huang et al. 2017; Wang et al. 2017). Closely related species, however, tend to exhibit greater similarities in terms of their behaviors, morphologies, and ecologies than more distantly related taxa (Blomberg et al. 2003). Similarly, there is a natural tendency for species to conserve their ancestral climatic niches over evolutionary time – a tendency referred to as phylogenetic niche conservation (PNC) (Peterson 1999; Wiens 2004; Losos 2008; Nyári and Reddy 2013). The PNC suggests that there is some process limiting the niche divergence among species, leading to more ecological similarity than expected by their phylogenetic relationships (Losos 2008).
When NC is strong, ecological speciation (through disruptive selection) can become difficult due to the incapacity of the taxa to adapt to new abiotic conditions. NC can, on the other hand, promote climatic isolation of incipient species, representing a key factor in the processes of allopatric speciation driven by neutral evolution (Wiens 2004; Wolf et al. 2010). As speciation through neutral evolution results from the accumulation of mutations over long periods of time, it would be expected to be a slower process than selection. The different processes of speciation (through neutral evolution or selection) leave different imprints on lineages. As such, examinations of the modes of niche evolution and the times involved become central to understanding diversification processes.
The Neotropical region is marked by a large climatic heterogeneity, diverse biomes (tropical and temperate forests, cold and hot deserts, etc.), and complex geomorphological patterns (Hoorn et al. 2010). Climatic heterogeneity has been documented to contribute to the diversification of plants (see, for example, Antonelli and Sanmartín 2011) and animals [including birds (Rocha et al. 2015), carnivorans (Zurano et al. 2017), and rodents (Parada et al. 2015; Reis et al. 2018)]. The wide variety of environments in the Neotropics provides unique opportunities for species diversification, promoting, in turn, niche diversification. Nonetheless, a tendency for niche conservatism among some sections of certain lineages could diminish diversification velocity (Wiens 2004). A better understanding of climatic niche evolution is therefore critical to understanding the forces that drive diversification. Neotropical rodents represent a mega-diverse group that inhabits a diversity of environments (Wilson et al. 2005). The Caviidae family is part of Cavioidea sensu stricto group, which presents a rich fossil record since the late Oligocene (Patton et al. 2015). It is estimated that the current members of Caviidae began to diversify at some time between the late Oligocene (Álvarez et al. 2017) and the middle Miocene (Pérez and Pol 2012). The Caviidae comprises six extant genera belonging to three subfamilies: Cavia, Galea, Microcavia (Caviinae), Dolichotis (Dolichotinae), Kerodon and Hydrochoerus (Hydrochoerinae). The subfamilies of Caviidae show large morphological and ecological disparity: (i) the Caviinae are usually small and inhabit different open environments, wetland, and forest edges, (ii) the Dolichotinae are large with elongated limbs, and show preference for arid environments, and (iii) the species of subfamily Hydrochoerinae are the largest living rodents of the world with preference for flooded areas (Nowak 1999).
Representatives of the Caviidae family are distributed from extreme southern to extreme northern Neotropical regions (Holt et al. 2013; Patton et al. 2015), and their low diversification, affinity for open environments, and widespread ranges make them an ideal group for studying connections between evolution, niche occupation, and diversification processes in the Neotropical region. Likewise, a possible hypothesis to explain the low diversification of the Caviidae is the existence of the NC, which may constrain or delay speciation processes. The goal of our work is to analyze, from ecological niche modelling, if the slow diversification of the Caviidae family is the result of neutral or deterministic processes.
Materials and Methods
Data Collection and Ecological Niche Models (ENM)
Geo-referenced occurrence data were gathered for 13 current species of the family Caviidae (~ 65% of the species) from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (http://www.gbif.org) database and through bibliographic consultations (Patton et al. 2015) (Table S1). Occurrence data were corroborated using Patton et al. (2015) and IUCN distribution maps. Duplicate points were eliminated based on the resolution of the climate data layers considered (~ 5 km). All the species analyzed had more than ten occurrence records covering their geographic distributions. Our analyses were performed with only current species, as the fossil species of Caviidae do not have enough occurrences to be used in the ENM, and the Pliocene/Miocene climatic layers are nonexistent. To define the geographic domains of the models (which represents a crucial step in the implementation of ENMs [refer to Barve et al. 2011]), we considered the areas occupied by the species (i.e., the “M” of the BAM diagram; Soberón and Peterson 2005) as those within the distribution polygons published by IUCN. The data of 19 climatic variables were obtained from Worldclim2 (2017), with a resolution of 2.5 arc-minutes (~ 5 km). To avoid redundancy among predictor variables, correlation tests were run among the 19 variables, allowing the selection of a subset demonstrating only low correlations (r < 0.8) (Table S2).
Ecological niche models (ENM) were generated for each species using Maxent 3.4.1. software (Phillips et al. 2017). The optimal parameterization of the ENMs (i.e., using “features” parameters and “regularization multipliers” values of the Maxent configurations for the ENM of each species) was estimated using the ENM evaluate function of the ENMeval package, version 0.3.0 (Muscarella et al. 2014), in the R environment (version 3.4.4) (R Core Team 2018). The robustness of each model was evaluated through cross validation, partitioning their occurrences considering, first, two longitudinal blocks that were subsequently subdivided into latitudinal blocks – resulting in four geographically structured units. The ENMs were then calibrated using the data from three blocks, with the fourth block being used to validate the model projections. That procedure was repeated until each of the four blocks had been used as validation data. The blocks were obtained using the get.block function (SDMeval package; Muscarella et al. 2014). The use of blocks as a validation strategy has been shown to be a robust technique for evaluating the predictive performances of ENMs ( Bahn and McGill 2007; Aiello-Lammens et al. 2015; Fourcade et al. 2017). In relation to false-absence data, we follow the recommendations of Phillips et al. (2009) and weigh the selection of those points using a sample bias layer that produced sampling effort data for the order Rodentia obtained from the GBIF platform (refer to the Supplementary Material).
The AUC (Area Under the ROC Curve) and TSS (True Skill Statistics) indices were used to measure the robustness of the models. High values (i.e., near 1) for both of those metrics are widely considered to indicate the efficiencies of the models (Warren et al. 2008).
Reconstruction, Similarities, and the Phylogenetic Signal of Climatic Niche
The niche occupation profiles (NOP) were characterized based on the ENMs generated. The optimum values for each species in relation to the climatic variables utilized in the ENMs were used to estimate each NOP. The NOP were then used to reconstruct the phylogenetic niches of each species in the Caviidae family using phyloclim package (Heibl 2012).
We used the approach of Broennimann et al. (2012) to estimate overlap between each pair. Background environmental data for South America were obtained by extracting the values of environmental layers (the same used for ENMs) from a sample of 1000 randomly chosen points. That information was aggregated to the set of presence points for each species to undertake a principal component analysis (PCA) for each. Then, we used principal components to estimate niche overlap between each of the species by calculating the Schoener’s D index (Schoener 1968; Warren et al. 2008). The significance of niche overlap estimates were evaluated by comparing the D values observed with null distributions (Warren et al. 2008), using the ecospat.niche.equivalency.test function (ecospat package version 3.0, Di Cola et al. 2017). The measures of niche overlap were used to evaluate the relationships between divergence times of species and the D index values using age-range correlation analysis (ARC, Fitzpatrick et al. 2006). We also analyzed the disparity through time (DTT) for each NOP of environmental variables with the geiger package (Harmon et al. 2016). The DTT analysis quantifies trait variations between and among clades over time, with values greater than 1 representing greater disparity within the clades, and values less than 1 indicating greater disparity between the clades (Harmon et al. 2003). We also estimated the Morphological Disparity Index (MDI) for each DTT to determine to what degree our results differed from neutral evolution over time (Harmon et al. 2003). One thousand simulations were used to evaluate if the MDI was different from a neutral model of evolution. All analyses were performed based on the molecular phylogeny described by Álvarez et al. (2017). The species H. isthmius was incorporated into the genus utilizing the phylogenetic position and temporal estimate proposed by Rolland et al. (2014). All the data used in this article are available upon contact with the authors.
Results
Maxent models demonstrated high performance (Table S1), with high AUC (0.75–0.97) and TSS (0.54–0.93) values. The variables that best explained species distributions were associated with thermal amplitude (BIO7, Table S3) and precipitation during the year (BIO13 and BIO19, Table S3). NOP analyses detected that phylogenetically closely related species tended to inhabit regions with similar thermal amplitudes (BIO7) (Fig. 1a), with members of the Caviidae family occupying regions with relatively restricted thermal amplitudes, with an amplitude optimum (mean values) between 14 and 27ºC (Fig. 1a). NOP analyses also demonstrated that the different species occupy different environments, with biases toward drier habitats with relatively high precipitation rates (< 350 mm) in the wettest months (BIO13). At one extreme, Microcavia species inhabit regions with < 125 mm of rainfall per month, while species of the genus Hydrochoerus demonstrate their best adaptations to higher rainfall levels (between 250 and 330 mm per month). Ancestral reconstructions (node values) indicate that their common ancestor had a clear preference for drier environments, with optimal precipitation levels below 100 mm/month during the rainiest month (BIO13, Fig. 1b). That preference is confirmed by rainfall during the driest period of the year (BIO14), as most species demonstrated optimal requirements near 20–40 mm/month (Fig. S6, Supplementary Material). Precipitation during the coldest season of the year (BIO19), demonstrated high variability, up to 1000 mm/month, although those species did show a preference for drier climates (Fig. 1c). Results for other variables are reported in the Supplementary Material section (Fig. S6).
The analyses of niche overlap indicated that six pairs of species demonstrated greater overlap than expected from the null model (p < 0.05): C. aperea and C. fulgida (D = 0.59); C. aperea and H. hydrochaeris (D = 0.48); G. musteloides and G. leucoblephara (D = 0.57); G. leucoblephara and D. salinicola (D = 0.34); G. leucoblephara and M. australis (D = 0.46); and G. spixii and K. rupestris (D = 0.86) (Table 1). The ARC analysis indicated the existence of a significantly negative correlation (beta = -0.013; p = 0.01) between niche overlap and time of divergence (Fig. 2). As such, high climatic similarity was noted between phylogenetically closely related lineages, with less niche overlap between more phylogenetically distant lineages (Fig. 2). The DTT analysis and the MDI index support these results, indicating that BIO7, BIO13, and BIO19 follow a model of neutral evolution over time (p > 0.05) (Fig. 3; Table 2).
Discussion
Our results show that the climatic niches of species in the family Caviidae evolve slowly, supporting the phylogenetic niche conservatism idea, based on the following evidence: (i) the existence of a negative correlation between time of divergence and climatic niche overlap; (ii) the NOP (niche occupation profiles) analyses indicated a tendency for the species to occupy predominantly dry areas; and, (iii) the DTT analyses evidenced the divergence of climatic optimum among clades is lower than between clades. These findings are indicative of the importance of niche conservatism in the diversification processes of caviids in the Neotropics. As such, there appear to be constraints that limit dispersal to humid zones, preventing diversification into the variety of environments available across the Neotropical region. Cavies show diversification in terms of their sizes and morphologies among their different lineages (Álvarez et al. 2013), although there appears to be considerable evolutionary constraints within clades in terms of morphological differentiation (Álvarez et al. 2011). That tendency for initial morphological diversity between clades indicates that body size and shape are strongly phylogenetically constrained in this family of rodents. As such, the Caviidae family shows phenotypic constraints (Álvarez et al. 2011) associated with strong niche conservatism. These results indicate that the processes of speciation driven by the accumulation of neutral mutations favored by vicariant barriers represent an important driver of the slow diversification, when comparing with other extant caviomorph families, found among members of the Caviidae family.
Caviomorphs went through two high diversification events in their evolutionary history: the first one at the beginning of the Oligocene, and the second one at the beginning of the Miocene (Álvarez et al. 2017). In contrast to other Neotropical rodents, the family Caviidae show low rates of speciation (Álvarez et al. 2017). Molecular and paleontological studies support the view that the Caviidae family arose at some time during the late Oligocene (~ 24 Ma; Álvarez et al. 2017) or the middle Miocene (~ 16.5 Ma) (Pérez and Pol 2012; Patton et al. 2015), although fossil data and molecular calibrations converge on the conclusion that current lineages of the family began diversifying during the late Miocene, at ~ 7 Ma (Pérez and Pol 2012). The caviids are predominantly granivores/grazers with some synapomorphies linked to grinding function during mastication (Álvarez and Pérez 2019). During the middle to late Miocene the Neotropical region was predominantly arid, largely dominated by grazing mammals (Ortiz-Jaureguizar 1998), which may have favored morphological adaptive changes in caviids (Álvarez and Pérez 2019). Speciation processes under neutral evolution are generally driven by geographic and/or climatic barriers (Schluter 2009). Diverse geological events during the Miocene could have acted as effective geographic barriers, provoking speciation in some lineages. At the end of the Miocene (~ 5 Ma) and through the Pliocene up to lower middle part of Pleistocene (~ 0.8 Ma), the sea level increased up to ~ 100 m leading to an extensive marine transgression in the Orinoco, Amazon, and Parana basins (Hernández et al. 2005; Hubert and Renno 2006). These transgressions resulted in the isolation of numerous species in the lowland regions of north and central South America (Hernández et al. 2005; Ottone et al. 2013) that favored the diversification of various animal groups (Ferretti et al. 2012; Rocha et al. 2015; Guarnizo et al. 2016). After that marine transgression, the then highly saline soils altered regional vegetation composition, and served as a probable geographic barrier to dispersal as well (Rocha et al. 2015). Cavia aperea and C. tschudii, for example, diverged at ~ 3.7 Ma (Álvarez et al. 2017), after the last Miocene marine transgression (Hernández et al. 2005), with C. aperea being most concentrated at lower elevations in northern Argentina, Uruguay, and Caatinga and Cerrado regions of Brazil, and with disjunct populations in Venezuela and Colombia; C. tschudii is found in highland areas in northeastern Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru (Dunnum and Salazar-Bravo 2010). These two species appear to be isolated within the current dry Chaco region that had been inundated by the Miocene marine transgression (Werneck et al. 2011).
Additionally, allopatric processes favored by climatic barriers could also have been driven by diversification processes in the Caviidae family. Historical climatic changes exercised a strong influence on the expansion and retraction of open vegetation areas (Werneck et al. 2011; Costa et al. 2017). Forest areas tended to expand during humid periods, diminishing connectivity between open areas (Werneck et al. 2011). These expansion and contraction dynamics created conditions for the appearance of the Seasonally Dry Tropical Forest (SDTF) vegetation that extends from northeastern Brazil to Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador – forming an vegetation arc within the South American continent (Mogni et al. 2015). Those events established landscapes that influenced the dispersal of many animal species in the late Cenozoic (Zanella 2002), and the fragmentation of those areas due to the expansion and retraction of dry forests would have contributed to their geographic isolation (Werneck et al. 2011). Species of the genus Galea principally occupy open areas, with G. leucoblephara principally occupying the Chaco region of Argentina, Paraguay, and Bolivia, and the Monte region in Argentina; G. musteloides is principally distributed in the Puna region, in Bolivia and Peru; G. spixii has its greatest distribution in Brazil, restricted to Caatinga vegetation. As such, the current distribution patterns of the genus Galea in open areas could reflect the dynamics of SDTF retraction and expansion over time. The strong tendency for Galea species to inhabit arid and semiarid regions, and the difficulty they experience in crossing humid and closed vegetation areas apparently contributed to their reproductive isolation. As a result of the temporal dynamics of open vegetation areas, various sister species, and even populations of the same species associated with open areas, demonstrate disjunct distributions, such as the crab-eating fox Cerdocyon thous (Martinez et al. 2013), the bare-faced ibis Phimosus infuscatus (Matamala et al. 2012), and the pit viper Crotalus durissus (Ingenloff and Peterson 2015). Similar patterns of disjunct distributions have been observed with C. aperea, with a clear preference for open areas (with the Amazon forests being the principal barrier to connectivity between its populations). As such, there is a tendency among the Caviidae for phylogenetic niche conservatism, reflecting the fact that phylogenetically close lineages demonstrate greater similarity in their climatic niches than more distant species. The tendency to conserve niche characteristics arises, according to Wiens (2004), from the incapacity of those species to adapt to new environmental conditions, and climatic barriers will therefore have a fundamental role in their diversification (Pyron and Burbrink 2013). New dating techniques for divergence have demonstrated that diversification among the Caviidae has coincided with periods of climate change (for example: Benner et al. 2002; Darling et al. 2004; Zhang et al. 2006; Nascimento et al. 2013). As the group has a clear preference for dry climates, the recurrent dynamics of forest expansion and retraction could have driven the diversification of members of the Caviidae lineage by means of geographic and/or climatic isolation.
Processes that result in the interruption of gene flow between populations will facilitate speciation (Colley and Fischer 2013). Our results indicate the existence of a similarity in the climatic niches of most species of the Caviidae family and indicated their clear preference for open vegetation areas. Our results highlight that the niche differentiation of the species is driven by a neutral process of evolution, leading to the existence of an ecological divergence proportional to the time of separation of the species. The evidence that neutral evolution promoted Caviidae diversification can explain their slow diversification when compared to other families of the same lineage, such as species of the families Ctenomyidae (63 species in the past 19 Myr) or Echimyidae (91 species in the past 27 Myr) (Patton et al. 2015; Álvarez et al. 2017; IUCN 2017). The empirical data presented here demonstrate the contribution of phylogenetic niche conservatism to the processes of diversification on a continental scale.
References
Aiello-Lammens ME, Boria RA, Radosavljevic A, Viela B, Anderson RP (2015) spThin: an R package for spatial thinning of species occurrence records for use in ecological niche models. Ecography 38:1–5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.01132
Alroy J (2008) Dynamics of origination and extinction in the marine fossil record. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:11536–11542. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802597105
Álvarez A, Moyers Arévalo RL, Verzi DH (2017) Diversification patterns and size evolution in caviomorph rodents. Biol J Linnean Soc 121:907–922. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/biolinnean/blx026
Álvarez A, Pérez ME (2019) Deep changes in masticatory patterns and masseteric musculature configurations accompanied the eco-morphological evolution of cavioid rodents (Hystricognathi, Caviomorpha). Mammal Biol 96: 53–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.03.009
Álvarez A, Perez SI, Verzi DH (2011) Early evolutionary differentiation of morphological variation in the mandible of South American caviomorph rodents (Rodentia, Caviomorpha). Evol Biol 24:2687–2695. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02395.x
Álvarez A, Perez SI, Verzi DH (2013) Ecological and phylogenetic dimensions of cranial shape diversification in South American caviomorph rodents (Rodentia: Hystricomorpha). Biol J Linnean Soc 110:898–913. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12164
Antonelli A, Sanmartín I (2011) Why are there so many plant species in the Neotropics? Neotrop Plant Evol 60:403–414
Bahn V, McGill BJ (2007) Can niche-based distribution models outperform spatial interpolation? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:733–742. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00331.x
Barve N, Barve V, Jiménez-valverde A, Lira-Noriegaa A, Maher SP, Petersona AT, Soberóna J, Villalobos F (2011) The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling. Ecol Modell 222:1810–1819. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.02.011
Benner SA, Caraco MD, Thomson JM, Gaucher EA (2002) Planetary biology—paleontological, geological, and molecular histories of life. Science 296:864–868
Blomberg SP, Garland T Jr, Ives AR (2003) Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57:717. doi: https://doi.org/10.1554/0014-3820(2003)057[0717:TFPSIC]2.0.CO;2
Broennimann O, Fitzpatrick MC, Pearman PB, Petitpierre B, Pellissier L, Yoccoz NG, Thuiller W, Fortin MJ, Randin C, Zimmermann NE, Graham CH, Guisan A (2012) Measuring ecological niche overlap from occurrence and spatial environmental. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:481–497. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00698.x
Chaboureau A, Sepulchre P, Donnadieu Y, Franc A (2014) Tectonic-driven climate change and the diversification of angiosperms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:14066–14070 doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1324002111
Colley E, Fischer ML (2013) Especiação e seus mecanismos: histórico conceitual e avanços recentes. História, Ciências, Saúde, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro
Costa GC, Hampe A, Ledru MP, Martinez PA, Mazzochini GG. Shepard DB, Werneck FP, Moritz C, Carnaval AC (2017) Biome stability in South America over the last 30 kyr: inferences from long-term vegetation dynamics and habitat modelling. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 1–13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12694
Darling KF, Kucera M, Pudsey CJ, Wade CM (2004) Molecular evidence links cryptic diversification in polar planktonic protists to Quaternary climate dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:7657–7662. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402401101
de Queiroz K (1998) The general lineage concept of species, species criteria, and the process of speciation: a conceptual unification: a conceptual unification and terminological recommendations. In: Howard DJ and Berlocher SH (eds) Endless Forms: Species and Speciation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp57–75
Di Cola V, Broennimann O, Petitpierre B, Breiner FT, Amen MD, Randin C, Engler R, Pottier J, Pio D, Dubuis A, Pellissier L, Mateo RG, Hordijk W, Salamin N, Guisan A (2017) ecospat: an R package to support spatial analyses and modeling of species niches and distributions. Ecography 40:774–787
Dunnum J, Salazar-Bravo J (2010) Molecular systematics, taxonomy and biogeography of the genus Cavia (Rodentia: Caviidae). J Zool Syst Evol Res 48(4):376–388. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0469.2009.00561.x
Faith JT, Behrensmeyer AK (2013) Climate change and faunal turnover: testing the mechanics of the turnover-pulse hypothesis with South African fossil data. Paleobiology 39:609–627. doi: https://doi.org/10.1666/12043
Ferretti NE, Gonzalez A, Pérez-Miles F (2012) Historical biogeography of the genus Cyriocosmus (Araneae: Theraphosidae) in the Neotropics according to an event-based method and spatial analysis of vicariance. Zool Stud 51(4), 526–535. doi: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255991383
Fitzpatrick BM, Turelli M (2006) The geography of mammalian speciation: mixed signals For Peer Review from phylogenies and range maps. Evolution 60:601–615
Fourcade Y, Besnard AG, Secondi J (2017) Paintings predict the distribution of species, or the challenge of selecting environmental predictors and evaluation statistics. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 1–12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12684
Glor RE (2010) Phylogenetic insights on adaptive radiation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:251–270. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173447
Guarnizo CE, Werneck FP, Giugliano LG, Santos MG, Fenker J, Sousa L, D’Angiolella AB, Santos AR, Strüssmann C, Rodrigues MT, Dorado-Rodrigues TF, Gamble T, Colli GR (2016) Cryptic lineages and diversification of an endemic anole lizard (Squamata, Dactyloidae) of the Cerrado hotspot. Mol Phylogenet Evol 94:279–289. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2015.09.005
Harmon LJ, Schulte JA, Larson A, Losos JB (2003) Tempo and mode of evolutionary radiation in iguanian lizards. Science 301:961–964. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084786
Harmon LJ, Weir J, Brock C, Glor R, Challenger W, Hunt G, FitzJohn R, Pennell M, Slater G, Brown J, Uyeda J, Eastman J (2016) Package ‘geiger’ - Analysis of Evolutionary Diversification. doi: http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~lukeh/software.html.
Heibl C, Calenge C (2012) Integrating phylogenetics and climatic niche modeling. URL: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/phyloclim/Version=0.9.5
Hernández RM, Jordan TE, Dalenz Farjat A, Echavarría L, Idleman BD, Reynolds JH (2005) Age, distribution, tectonics, and eustatic controls of the Paranense and Caribbean marine transgressions in southern Bolivia and Argentina. J South Am Earth Sci 19:495–512. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2005.06.007
Holt BG, Lessard J, Borregaard MK, Fritz SA, Araujo MB, Dimitrov DP, Fabre P, Graham CH, Graves GR, Jønsson KA, Nogués-Bravo D, Wang Z, Whittaker RJ, Fjeldså J, Rahbek C (2013) An update of Wallace’s zoogeographic regions of the world. Science 339:74–78. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1228282
Hoorn C, Wesselingh FP, ter Steege H, Bermudez MA, Mora A, Sevink J, Sanmartín I, Sanchez-Meseguer A, Anderson CL, Figueiredo JP, Jaramillo C, Riff D, Negri FR, Hooghiemstra H, Lundberg J, Stadler T, Särkinen T, Antonelli A (2010) Amazonia through time: Andean uplift, climate change, landscape evolution, and biodiversity. Science 330:927–931. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194585
Huang B, Huang C, Huang C, Liao P (2017) Continuation of the genetic divergence of ecological speciation by spatial environmental heterogeneity in island endemic plants. Sci Rep 1–13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05900-1
Hubert N, Renno JF (2006) Historical biogeography of South American freshwater fishes. J Biogeogr 33:1414–1436. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01518.x
Hutchinson GE (1959) Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals?. Am Nat 93:145–159
Ingenloff K, Peterson AT (2015) Trans-Amazon dispersal potential for Crotalus durissus during Pleistocene climate events. Biota Neotrop 15:1–7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-06032015008113
IUCN (2017) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2017-3. doi: http://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed 5 Dec 2017
Losos JB (2008) Phylogenetic niche conservatism, phylogenetic signal and the relationship between phylogenetic relatedness and ecological similarity among species. Ecol Lett 11(10):995–1003
Martinez PA, Marti DA, Molina WF, Bidau CJ (2013) Bergmann’s rule across the equator: a case study in Cerdocyon thous (Canidae). J Anim Ecol 82:997–1008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12076
Matamala M, Echeverri A, Medina I, Salazar Gómez EN, Alarcón V, Cadena CD (2012) Bare-faced Ibis (Phimosus infuscatus), version 1.0. In Neotropical Birds Online (T. S. Schulenberg, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca
McPeek MA (2008) The ecological dynamics of clade diversification and community assembly. Am Nat 172(6): 270:284. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/593137
Mogni VY, Oakley LJ, Prado DE (2015) The distribution of woody legumes in Neotropical dry forests: the Pleistocene arc theory 20 years on. Edinburgh J Bot 72:35–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960428614000298
Muscarella R, Galante PJ, Soley-guardia M, Boria RA, Kass JM, Anderson RP (2014) ENMeval: an R package for conducting spatially independent evaluations and estimating optimal model complexity for MAXENT ecological niche models. Methods Ecol Evol 5:1198–1205. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12261
Nascimento FF, Lazar A, Menezes AN, Durans AM, Moreira JC, Salazar-Bravo J, DAndrea PS, Bonvicino CR (2013) The role of historical barriers in the diversification processes in open vegetation formations during the Miocene/Pliocene using an ancient rodent lineage as a model. PLoS ONE 8(4): e61924. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061924
Nowak RM (1999) Walker’s Mammals of the World, 6th Ed. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Nyári ÁS, Reddy S (2013) Comparative phyloclimatic analysis and evolution of ecological niches in the Scimitar Babblers (Aves: Timaliidae: Pomatorhinus). PLoS ONE 8(2): e55629. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055629
Ortiz-Jaureguizar E (1998) Paleoecología y Evolución de la fauna de mamíferos de américa del sur durante la «edad de las planicies australes» (mioceno superior-plioceno superior). Estud Geol 169:161–169
Ottone EG, Mazurier SMER, Salinas A (2013) Palinomorfos miocenos del subsuelo de Santiago del Estero, Argentina. BMC Evol Biol 50:509–521. doi: https://doi.org/10.5710/AMEGH.24.07.2013.603
Parada A, D’Elía G, Palma RE (2015) The influence of ecological and geographical context in the radiation of Neotropical sigmodontine rodents. BMC Evol Biol 15:172. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-015-0440-z
Patton JL, Pardiñas UFJ, D’Elía G (2015) Mammals of South America, Volume 2 Rodents. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Pérez ME, Pol D (2012) Major radiations in the evolution of caviid rodents: reconciling fossils, ghost lineages, and relaxed molecular clocks. PLoS ONE 7(10): e48380. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048380
Peterson AT (1999) Conservatism of ecological niches in evolutionary time. Science 285:1265–1267. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.285.5431.1265
Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Dudík M, Schapire RE, Blair ME (2017) Opening the black box: an open-source release of Maxent. Ecography 40:887–893. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.03049
Phillips SJ, Miroslav D, Jane E, H Graham C, Anthony L, Leathwick J, Ferrier S (2009) Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol Appl 19:181–197
Pyron RA, Burbrink FT (2013) Phylogenetic estimates of speciation and extinction rates for testing ecological and evolutionary hypotheses. Trends Ecol Evol 1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.09.007
Pyron RA, Costa GC, Patten MA, Burbrink FT (2015) Phylogenetic niche conservatism and the evolutionary basis of ecological speciation. Biol Rev 90:1248–1262. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12154
R Core Team (2018) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/
Reis J, Bidau CJ, Maestri R, Martinez PA (2018) Diversification of the climatic niche drove the recent processes of speciation in Sigmodontinae (Rodentia, Cricetidae). Mamm Rev 48:328–332. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12128
Rocha TC, Sequeira F, Aleixo A, Rêgo PS, Sampaio I, Schneider H, Vallinoto M (2015) Molecular phylogeny and diversification of a widespread Neotropical rainforest bird group: the Buff-throated Woodcreeper complex, Xiphorhynchus guttatus / susurrans (Aves:Dendrocolaptidae). Mol Phyl Evol 85:131–140. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2015.02.004
Rolland J, Condamine FL, Jiguet F, Morlon H (2014) Faster speciation and reduced extinction in the tropics contribute to the mammalian latitudinal diversity gradient. PLoS Biol 12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001775
Rundle HD, Nosil P (2005) Ecological speciation. Ecol Lett 8:336–352. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00715.x
Ruzzante DE, Sandra JW, Jhon CG, Cussac VE, Habit E, Zemlak SS, Adams EDM (2008) Climate control on ancestral population dynamics: insight from Patagonian fish phylogeography. Mol Ecol 2234–2244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03738.x
Schluter D (2000) The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Schluter D (2009) Evidence for ecological speciation and its alternative. Science 323:737–741. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1160006
Schoener TW (1968) The anolis lizards of Bimini: resource partitioning in a complex fauna. Ecology 49:704–726.
Silvestro D, Antonelli A, Salamin N, Salamin N, Quental TB (2015) The role of clade competition in the diversification of North American canids. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:8684–8689. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502803112
Soberón J (2007) Grinnellian and Eltonian niches and geographic distributions of species. Ecol Lett 10:1115–1123. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01107.x
Soberón J, Peterson AT (2005) Interpretation of models of fundamental ecological niches and species’ distributional areas. Biodiversity Informatics 2:1–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhm022
Thomas CD (2010) Climate, climate change and range boundaries. Divers Distrib 16:488–495. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00642.x
Vrba E S (1992) Mammals as a key to evolutionary theory. J Mammal 73: 1–28
Wang P, Liu Y, Liu Y, Chang Y, Wang N, Zhang Z (2017) The role of niche divergence and geographic arrangement in the speciation of Eared Pheasants (Crossoptilon, Hodgson 1938). Mol Phylogen Evol 113:1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2017.05.003
Warren DL, Glor RE, Turelli M (2008) Environmental niche equivalency versus conservatism: quantitative approaches to niche evolution. Evolution 62:2868–2883. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00482.x
Werneck FP, Costa GC, Colli GR, Prado DE, Sites JW (2011) Revisiting the historical distribution of seasonally dry tropical forests: new insights based on palaeodistribution modelling and palynological evidence. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:272–288. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00596.x
Wiens JJ (2004) Speciation and ecology revisted: phylogenetic niche conservatism and the origin of species. Evolution 58:193–197. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb01586.x
Wiley EO (1988) Vicariance biogeography. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 19:513–542. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.19.110188.002501
Wolf JBW, Lindell J, Backstro N (2010) Speciation genetics: current status and evolving approaches. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci Sciences 365:1717–1733. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0023
Zanella FC (2002) Systematics and biogeography of the bee genus Caenonomada Ashmead, 1899 (Hymenoptera:Apidae:Tapinotaspidini). Stud Neotrop Fauna Environ 37:249–261. doi: https://doi.org/10.1076/snfe.37.3.249.8571
Zhang P, Chen Y-Q, Zhou H, Liu Y, Wang X, Papenfuss TJ, Wake DB, Qu L (2006) Phylogeny, evolution, and biogeography of Asiatic salamanders (Hynobiidae). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:7360–7365. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0602325103
Zurano JP, Martinez PA, Canto-Hernandez J, Montoya-Burgos JI, Costa GC (2017) Morphological and ecological divergence in South American canids. J Biogeogr 44:821–833. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.12984
Acknowledgements
DS thanks COPES scientific initiation grant (PVA4677-2016) and PAM thanks the funding agency CNPq (grant nº431463/2016-6) and PROEF(CAPES/FAPITEC/Proc 88881.157451/2017-01) for the financial support. We thanks to Dr. Diego Verzi and one anonymous reviewer for the constructive contribution.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 53624 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
da Silva, D., Aires, A.E., Zurano, J.P. et al. Changing Only Slowly: The Role of Phylogenetic Niche Conservatism in Caviidae (Rodentia) Speciation. J Mammal Evol 27, 713–721 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10914-020-09501-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10914-020-09501-0