Phylogenetic analysis of adaptation in comparative physiology and biomechanics: overview and a case study of thermal physiology in treefrogs

A Cautionary Note on "A Cautionary Note on the Use of Ornstein Uhlenbeck Models in Macroevolutionary Studies"

Models based on the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process have become standard for the comparative study of adaptation. Cooper et al. (2016) have cast doubt on this practice by claiming statistical problems with fitting Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models to comparative data. Specifically, they claim that statistical tests of Brownian motion may have too high Type I error rates and that such error rates are exacerbated by measurement error. In this note, we argue that these results have little relevance to the estimation of adaptation with Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models for three reasons. First, we point out that Cooper et al. (2016) did not consider the detection of distinct optima (e.g. for different environments), and therefore did not evaluate the standard test for adaptation. Second, we show that consideration of parameter estimates, and not just statistical significance, will usually lead to correct inferences about evolutionary dynamics. Third, we show that bias due to measurement error can be corrected for by standard methods. We conclude that Cooper et al. (2016) have not identified any statistical problems specific to Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models, and that their cautions against their use in comparative analyses are unfounded and misleading. [adaptation, Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model, phylogenetic comparative method.].

Bridging Performance and Adaptive Landscapes to Understand Long-Term Functional Evolution

AbstractUnderstanding functional adaptation demands an integrative framework that captures the complex interactions between form, function, ecology, and evolutionary processes. In this review, we discuss how to integrate the following two distinct approaches to better understand functional evolution: (1) the adaptive landscape approach (ALA), aimed at finding adaptive peaks for different ecologies, and (2) the performance landscape approach (PLA), aimed at finding performance peaks for different ecologies. We focus on the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process as the evolutionary model for the ALA and on biomechanical modeling to estimate performance for the PLA. Whereas both the ALA and the PLA have each given insight into functional adaptation, separately they cannot address how much performance contributes to fitness or whether evolutionary constraints have played a role in form-function evolution. We show that merging these approaches leads to a deeper understanding of these issues. By comparing the locations of performance and adaptive peaks, we can infer how much performance contributes to fitness in species' current environments. By testing for the relevance of history on phenotypic variation, we can infer the influence of past selection and constraints on functional adaptation. We apply this merged framework in a case study of turtle shell evolution and explain how to interpret different possible outcomes. Even though such outcomes can be quite complex, they represent the multifaceted relations among function, fitness, and constraints.

Both Diet and Sociality Affect Primate Brain-Size Evolution

Increased brain size in humans and other primates is hypothesized to confer cognitive benefits but brings costs associated with growing and maintaining energetically expensive neural tissue. Previous studies have argued that changes in either diet or levels of sociality led to shifts in brain size, but results were equivocal. Here we test these hypotheses using phylogenetic comparative methods designed to jointly account for and estimate the effects of adaptation and phylogeny. Using the largest current sample of primate brain and body sizes with observation error, complemented by newly compiled diet and sociality data, we show that both diet and sociality have influenced the evolution of brain size. Shifting from simple to more complex levels of sociality resulted in relatively larger brains, while shifting to a more folivorous diet led to relatively smaller brains. While our results support the role of sociality, they modify a range of ecological hypotheses centered on the importance of frugivory, and instead indicate that digestive costs associated with increased folivory may have resulted in relatively smaller brains. [adaptation; allometry; bayou; evolutionary trend; energetic constraints; phylogenetic comparative methods; primate brain size; Slouch; social-brain hypothesis.].