鸟喙和脑壳形态的相关进化仅存在于部分鸟类支系中。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY Journal of Morphology Pub Date : 2024-05-08 DOI:10.1002/jmor.21703
Xiaoni Xu, Rossy Natale
{"title":"鸟喙和脑壳形态的相关进化仅存在于部分鸟类支系中。","authors":"Xiaoni Xu,&nbsp;Rossy Natale","doi":"10.1002/jmor.21703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Complex morphological structures, such as skulls or limbs, are often composed of multiple morphological components (e.g., bones, sets of bones) that may evolve in a covaried manner with one another. Previous research has reached differing conclusions on the number of semi-independent units, or modules, that exist in the evolution of structures and on the strength of the covariation, or integration, between these hypothesized modules. We focus on the avian skull as an example of a complex morphological structure for which highly variable conclusions have been reached in the numerous studies analyzing support for a range of simple to complex modularity hypotheses. We hypothesized that past discrepancies may stem from both the differing densities of data used to analyze support for modularity hypotheses and the differing taxonomic levels of study. To test these hypotheses, we applied a comparative method to 3D geometric morphometric data collected from the skulls of a diverse order of birds (the Charadriiformes) to test support for 11 distinct hypotheses of modular skull evolution. Across all Charadriiformes, our analyses suggested that charadriiform skull evolution has been characterized by the semi-independent, but still correlated, evolution of the beak from the rest of the skull. When we adjusted the density of our morphometric data, this result held, but the strength of the signal varied substantially. Additionally, when we analyzed subgroups within the order in isolation, we found support for distinct hypotheses between subgroups. Taken together, these results suggest that differences in the methodology of past work (i.e., statistical method and data density) as well as clade-specific dynamics may be the reasons past studies have reached varying conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":16528,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Morphology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jmor.21703","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correlated evolution of beak and braincase morphology is present only in select bird clades\",\"authors\":\"Xiaoni Xu,&nbsp;Rossy Natale\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jmor.21703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Complex morphological structures, such as skulls or limbs, are often composed of multiple morphological components (e.g., bones, sets of bones) that may evolve in a covaried manner with one another. Previous research has reached differing conclusions on the number of semi-independent units, or modules, that exist in the evolution of structures and on the strength of the covariation, or integration, between these hypothesized modules. We focus on the avian skull as an example of a complex morphological structure for which highly variable conclusions have been reached in the numerous studies analyzing support for a range of simple to complex modularity hypotheses. We hypothesized that past discrepancies may stem from both the differing densities of data used to analyze support for modularity hypotheses and the differing taxonomic levels of study. To test these hypotheses, we applied a comparative method to 3D geometric morphometric data collected from the skulls of a diverse order of birds (the Charadriiformes) to test support for 11 distinct hypotheses of modular skull evolution. Across all Charadriiformes, our analyses suggested that charadriiform skull evolution has been characterized by the semi-independent, but still correlated, evolution of the beak from the rest of the skull. When we adjusted the density of our morphometric data, this result held, but the strength of the signal varied substantially. Additionally, when we analyzed subgroups within the order in isolation, we found support for distinct hypotheses between subgroups. Taken together, these results suggest that differences in the methodology of past work (i.e., statistical method and data density) as well as clade-specific dynamics may be the reasons past studies have reached varying conclusions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Morphology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jmor.21703\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Morphology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmor.21703\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Morphology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmor.21703","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

复杂的形态结构,如头骨或四肢,通常由多种形态成分(如骨骼、骨骼组)组成,这些成分可能以相互共变的方式进化。以往的研究对结构进化过程中存在的半独立单元或模块的数量以及这些假定模块之间的共变或整合强度得出了不同的结论。我们以鸟类头骨为例,说明在分析支持一系列从简单到复杂的模块化假说的众多研究中,对这种复杂形态结构得出的结论存在很大差异。我们假设,过去的差异可能源于用于分析支持模块化假说的数据密度不同,以及研究的分类水平不同。为了验证这些假设,我们对从不同鸟纲(夏鸟形目)头骨中收集的三维几何形态计量数据采用了一种比较方法,以检验对模块化头骨进化的 11 种不同假设的支持情况。我们的分析表明,在所有戟形目鸟类中,戟形目头骨进化的特点是喙与头骨其他部分的进化是半独立的,但仍然是相关的。当我们调整形态计量数据的密度时,这一结果仍然成立,但信号的强度有很大的不同。此外,当我们单独分析目内的亚群时,我们发现亚群之间的不同假说也得到了支持。综合来看,这些结果表明,过去研究方法的不同(即统计方法和数据密度)以及特定支系的动态变化可能是过去研究得出不同结论的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Correlated evolution of beak and braincase morphology is present only in select bird clades

Complex morphological structures, such as skulls or limbs, are often composed of multiple morphological components (e.g., bones, sets of bones) that may evolve in a covaried manner with one another. Previous research has reached differing conclusions on the number of semi-independent units, or modules, that exist in the evolution of structures and on the strength of the covariation, or integration, between these hypothesized modules. We focus on the avian skull as an example of a complex morphological structure for which highly variable conclusions have been reached in the numerous studies analyzing support for a range of simple to complex modularity hypotheses. We hypothesized that past discrepancies may stem from both the differing densities of data used to analyze support for modularity hypotheses and the differing taxonomic levels of study. To test these hypotheses, we applied a comparative method to 3D geometric morphometric data collected from the skulls of a diverse order of birds (the Charadriiformes) to test support for 11 distinct hypotheses of modular skull evolution. Across all Charadriiformes, our analyses suggested that charadriiform skull evolution has been characterized by the semi-independent, but still correlated, evolution of the beak from the rest of the skull. When we adjusted the density of our morphometric data, this result held, but the strength of the signal varied substantially. Additionally, when we analyzed subgroups within the order in isolation, we found support for distinct hypotheses between subgroups. Taken together, these results suggest that differences in the methodology of past work (i.e., statistical method and data density) as well as clade-specific dynamics may be the reasons past studies have reached varying conclusions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Morphology
Journal of Morphology 医学-解剖学与形态学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
119
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Morphology welcomes articles of original research in cytology, protozoology, embryology, and general morphology. Articles generally should not exceed 35 printed pages. Preliminary notices or articles of a purely descriptive morphological or taxonomic nature are not included. No paper which has already been published will be accepted, nor will simultaneous publications elsewhere be allowed. The Journal of Morphology publishes research in functional, comparative, evolutionary and developmental morphology from vertebrates and invertebrates. Human and veterinary anatomy or paleontology are considered when an explicit connection to neontological animal morphology is presented, and the paper contains relevant information for the community of animal morphologists. Based on our long tradition, we continue to seek publishing the best papers in animal morphology.
期刊最新文献
Osteology of the Small-Sized Hyphessobrycon piabinhas Fowler 1941 (Characiformes, Characidae) With a Discussion on Developmentally Truncated Characters in the Family Issue Information The Ovary Structure in Terrestrial Parasitengona Mites: The Case of Trombidiidae (Acariformes: Parasitengona) Precaudal Vertebrae in the Postcranial Region of Moray Eels Form Ventral Processes Postnatal Skull Development Reveals a Conservative Pattern in Living and Fossil Vizcachas Genus Lagostomus (Rodentia, Chinchillidae)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1