Advertisement

Journal of Biosciences

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 95–113 | Cite as

Phylogenetic tests of distribution patterns in South Asia: towards an integrative approach

  • Sayantan BiswasEmail author
  • Samraat S. Pawar
Article

Abstract

The last four decades have seen an increasing integration of phylogenetics and biogeography. However, a dearth of phylogenetic studies has precluded such biogeographic analyses in South Asia until recently. Noting the increase in phylogenetic research and interest in phylogenetic biogeography in the region, we outline an integrative framework for studying taxon distribution patterns. While doing so, we pay particular attention to challenges posed by the complex geological and ecological history of the region, and the differences in distribution across taxonomic groups. We outline and compare three widely used phylogenetic biogeographic approaches: topology-based methods (TBMs), pattern-based methods (PBMs) and event-based methods (EBMs). TBMs lack a quantitative framework and utilize only part of the available phylogenetic information. Hence, they are mainly suited for preliminary enquiries. Both PBMs and EBMs have a quantitative framework, but we consider the latter to be particularly suited to the South Asian context since they consider multiple biogeographic processes explicitly, and can accommodate a reticulated history of areas. As an illustration, we present a biogeographic analysis of endemic Sri Lankan agamid lizards. The results provide insights into the relative importance of multiple processes and specific zones in the radiation of two speciose lizard clades.

Keywords

Agamidae disjunct distribution dispersal phylogenetic biogeography Sri Lanka vicariance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ashton P S and Gunatilleke CVS 1987 New light on the plant geography of Ceylon. I. Historical plant geography;J. Biogeog. 14 249–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Austin J D, Lougheed S C, Moler P E and Boag P T 2003 Phylogenetics, zoogeography, and the role of dispersal and vicariance in the evolution of theRana catesbeiana (Anura: Ranidae) species group;Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 80 601–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bahir M M and Maduwage K P 2005Calotes desilvai, a new agamid lizard from Morningside Forest, Sri Lanka;Raffles Bull. Zool. (Suppl. No. 12) 381–392Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bahir M M and Silva A 2005Otocryptis nigristigma, a new species of agamid lizard from Sri Lanka;Raffles Bull. Zool. (Suppl. No. 12) 393–406Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bell C D and Donoghue M J 2003 Phylogeny and biogeography of Morinaceae (Dipsacales) based on nuclear and chloroplast DNA sequences;Org. Divers. Evol. 3 227–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bossuyt F, Meegaskumbura M, Beenaerts N, Gower D J, Pethiyagoda R, Roelants K, Mannaert A, Wilkinson M, Bahir M M, Manamendra-Arachchi K, Ng P K L, Schneider C J, Oommen O V, and Milinkovitch M C 2004 Local endemism within the Western Ghats-Sri Lanka biodiversity hotspot;Science 306 479–481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bossuyt F and Milinkovitch M C 2001 Amphibians as indicators of early Tertiary “Out-of-India” dispersal of vertebrates;Science 292 93–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brown J H and Lomolino M B 1998Biogeography (Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cadle J E, Dessauer H C, Gans C and Gartside D F 1990 Phylogenetic relationships and molecular evolution in uropeltid snakes (Serpentes: Uropeltidae): allozymes and albumin immunology;Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 40 293–320Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Conti E, Eriksson T, Schönenberger J, Systema K J and Baum D A 2002 Early Tertiary Out-of-India dispersal of Crypteroniaceae: evidence from phylogeny and molecular dating;Evolution 56 1931–1942PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cooray P G 1967 An introduction to the geology of Ceylon;Spolia Zeylan. 311–324Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Coyne J A and Orr H A 2004Speciation (Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Crisci J V, Katinas L and Posadas P 2003Historical biogeography: an introduction (Cambridge: Harvard University Press)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Croizat L 1964Space, time, form: The biological synthesis (Caracas)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Das I 1996Biogeography of the reptiles of South Asia (Malabar: Krieger)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dilger W C 1952 The Brij Hypothesis as an explanation for the tropical faunal similarities between the Western Ghats and the eastern Himalayas, Assam, Burma, and Malaya;Evolution 40 977–996Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Donoghue M J and Moore B R 2003 Toward an integrative historical biogeography;Integr. Comp. Biol. 43 261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Erdelen W 1988 Population dynamics and dispersal in three species of agamid lizards in Sri Lanka:Calotes calotes, C. versicolor andC. nigrilabris;J. Herpetol. 22 42–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Erdelen W 1996 Biogeography and conservation of south Asian herpetofauna; inBiology and conservation of the amphibians, reptiles and their habitats in South Asia (ed.) A deSilva (Colombo: Amphibian and Research Organisation of Sri Lanka) pp 76–96Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Erdelen W and Preu C 1990 Quarternary coastal and vegetation dynamics in the Palk strait region, south Asia —the evidence and hypotheses; inVegetation and erosion (ed.) J B Thornes (London: John Wiley) pp 491–504Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fernando C H 1984Ecology and biogeography in Sri Lanka (The Hague: Dr W Junk Publishers)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gans C 1976 Aspects of the biology of uropeltid snakes; inMorphology and biology of reptiles (ed.) D Bellairs (London: Academic Press) pp 191–204Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gower D J, Kupfer A, Oommen O V, Himstedt W, Nussbaum R A, Loader S P, Presswell B, Müller H, Krishna S B, Boistel R and Wilkinson M 2002 A molecular phylogeny of ichthyophiid caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Ichthyophiidae): out of India or out of South East Asia;Proc. R. Soc. London B 269 1563–1569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Graham C H, Ferrier S, Huettman F, Moritz C and Peterson A T 2004a New developments in museum-based informatics and applications in biodiversity analysis;Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 497–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Graham C H, Ron S R, Santos J C, Schneider C J and Moritz C 2004b Integrating phylogenetics and environmental niche models to explore speciation mechanisms in dendrobatid frogs;Evolution 58 1781–1793PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Harold A S and Mooi R D 1994 Areas of endemism: Definition and recognition criteria;Syst. Biol. 43 261–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hennig W 1966Phylogenetic systematics (Urbana: University of Illinois Press)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hora S L 1949 Satpura hypothesis of the distribution of the malayan fauna and flora in peninsular india;Proc. Natl. Inst. Sci. India 15 309–314Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Karanth K P 2003 Evolution of disjunct distributions among wetzone species of the Indian subcontinent: Testing various hypotheses using a phylogenetic approach;Curr. Sci. 85 1276–1283Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kearey P and Vine F J 1996Global tectonics (Boston: Blackwell Science)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kitching I J, Forey P L, Humphries C J and Williams D M 1998Cladistics: the theory and practice of parsimony analysis (New York: Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Knowles L L 2004 The burgeoning field of statistical phylogeography;J. Evol. Biol. 17 1–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Linder H P 2001 On areas of endemism, with an example from the African Restionaceae;Syst. Biol. 50 892–912PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lomolino M V and Heaney L R 2004Frontiers ofbiogeography: new directions in the geography of nature (Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Macey J R, Schulte II J A, Ananjeva N B, Larson A, RastegarPouyani N, Shammakov S M and Papenfuss T J 1998 Phylogenetic relationships among agamid lizards of theLaudakia caucasia species group: testing hypotheses of biogeographic fragmentation and an area cladogram for the Iranian Plateau;Mol. Phyl. Evol. 10 118–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Macey J R, Schulte II J A, Larson A, Anajeva N B, Wang Y, Pethiyagoda R, Rastegar-Pouyani N and Papenfuss T J 2000 Evaluating Trans-Tethys migration: an example using acrodont lizard phylogenetics;Mol. Phyl. Evol. 49 233–256Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Manamendra-Arachchi K and Liyanage S 1994 Conservation and distribution of the agamid lizards of Sri Lanka with illustrations of the extant species;J. South Asian Nat. Hist. 1 77–96Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mani M S 1974Ecology and biogeography in India (The Hague: Dr W Junk b v Publishers)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mayr E 1963Animal species and evolution (Cambridge: Belknap Press)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    McDowall R M 2004 What biogeography is: a place for process;J. Biogeogr. 31 345–351Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Moritz C, Patton J L, Schneider C J and Smith T B 2000 Diversification of rainforest faunas: an integrated molecular approach;Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31 533–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Morley R J 2000Origin and evolution of tropical rain forests (Chichester: John Wiley)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Morrone J J 1994 On the identification of areas of endemism;Syst. Biol. 43 438–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nelson G J and Platnick NI 1981Systematics and biogeography: cladistics andvicariance (New York: Columbia University Press)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nielsen R and Wakeley J 2001 Distinguishing migration from isolation: a Markov chain Monte Carlo approach;Genetics 158 885–896PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Page RDM 1988 Quantitative cladistic biogeography: constructing and comparing area cladograms;Syst. Zool. 37 254–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Page RDM 1989 Comments on component-compatibility in historical biogeography;Cladistics 5 167–182Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Page RDM 1990 Component Analysis: A valiant failure?;Cladistics 6 119–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Page RDM 1994 Maps between trees and cladistic analysis of historical associations among genes, organisms, and areas;Syst. Biol. 43 58–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Page RDM 2003 Introduction; inTangled trees: phylogeny, cospeciation, and coevolution (ed.) RDM Page (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press) pp 1–21Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Peterson A T, Soberón J and Sanchez-Cordero V 1999 Conservation of ecological niches in evolutionary time;Science 285 1265–1267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pethiyagoda R and Manamendra-Arachchi K 1998 A revision of the endemic Sri Lankan agamid lizard genusCeratophora Gray, 1835, with description of two new species;J. South Asian Nat.Hist. 3 1–50Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Platnick NI 1981 Widespread taxa and biogeographic congrunce; inAdvances in Cladistics (eds) V A Funk and D R Brooks (New York: New York Botanical Gardens) pp 223–227Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Platnick N I and Nelson G 1978 A method of analysis for historical biogeography;Syst. Zool. 27 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Randhawa M S 1945 Progressive dessication of northern India;J. Bom. Nat. Hist. Soc. 45 558–565Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rannala B and Michalakis Y 2003 Population genetics and cospeciation: from process to pattern; inTangled trees: phylogeny, cospeciation, and coevolution (ed.) RDM Page (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press) pp 120–143Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Roelants K, Jiang J and Bossuyt F 2004 Endemic ranid (Amphibia: Anura) genera in southern mountain ranges of the Indian subcontinent represent ancient frog lineages: evidence from molecular data;Mol. Phyl. Evol. 31 730–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ronquist F 1996aDIVA [Version: 1.1 ] Uppsala University, Uppsala. http://www.ebc.uu.se/systzoo/research/diva/diva.htmlGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ronquist F 1996b Reconstructing the history of host-parasite associations using generalised parsimony;Cladistics 11 73–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ronquist F 1997a Dispersal-vicariance analysis: a new approach to the quantification of historical biogeography;Syst. Biol. 46 195–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ronquist F 1997b Phylogenetic approaches in coevolution and biogeography;Zool. Scripta 26 313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ronquist F 1998 Three-dimensional cost-matrix optimization and maximum cospeciation;Cladistics 14 167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ronquist F 2002TreeFitter [Version: 1.0] Uppsala University, Uppsala. http://www.ebc.uu.se/systzoo/research/treefitter/ treefitter.htmlGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ronquist F 2003 Parsimony analysis of coevolving species associations; inTangled trees: phylogeny, cospeciation, and coevolution (ed.) RDM Page (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press) pp 22–64Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ronquist F and Nylin S 1990 Process and pattern in the evolution of species associations;Syst. Zool. 39 323–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rosen D E 1978 Vicariant patterns and historical explanation in biogeography;Syst. Zool. 27 159–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Sanmartín I, Enghoff H and Ronquist F 2001 Patterns of animal dispersal, vicariance and diversification in the Holartic;Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 73 345–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sanmartín I and Ronquist F 2002 New solutions to old problems: widespread taxa, redundant distributions and missing areas in event-based biogeography;Anim. Biodiv. Conserv. 25 75–93Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Sanmartín I and Ronquist F 2004 Southern Hemisphere biogeography inferred by event-based models: Plant versus animal patterns;Syst. Biol. 53 216–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Schulte H J A, Macey J R, Pethiyagoda R and Larson A 2002 Rostral horn evolution among agamid lizards of the genusCeratophora endemic to Sri Lanka;Mol. Phyl. Evol. 22 111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schulte J A, Vindum J V, Win H, Thin T, Lwin K S and Shein A K 2004 Phylogenetic relationships of the genusPtyctolaemus (Squamata: Agamidae), with a description of a new species from the Chin Hills of western Myanmar;Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci. 55 222–245Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Senanayake F R and Moyle P B 1982 Conservation of freshwater fishes of Sri Lanka;Biol. Conserv. 22 181–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Senanayake F R, Soulé M E, and Senner J W 1977 Habitat values and endemicity in the vanishing rain forests of Sri Lanka;Nature (London) 265 351–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Swan L W 1993 The Satpura Hypotheses: a biogeographical challenge to geology;J. Bom. Nat. Hist. Soc. 90 141–157Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Templeton A R 2004 Statistical phylogeography: methods of evaluating and minimizing inference errors;Mol. Ecol. 13 789–809PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Thornton I W B, Cook S, Edwards J S, Harrison R D, Schipper C, Shanahan M, Singadan R and Yamuna R 2001 Colonization of an island volcano, Long Island, Papua New Guinea, and an emergent island, Motmot, in its caldera lake. VII. Overview and discussion;J. Biogeogr. 28 1389–1408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Uetz P 2004The EMBL reptile database (http://www.embl-heidelberg.de/~uetz/Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Van Veller M G P and Brooks D R 2001 When simplicity is not parsimonious: a priori and a posteriori methods in historical biogeography;J. Biogeogr. 28 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Van Veller M G P, Brooks D R and Zandee M 2003 Cladistic and phylogenetic biogeography: the art and the science of discovery;J. Biogeogr. 30 319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Van Veller M G P, Kornet D J and Zandee M 2000 Methods in vicariance biogeography: Assessment of the implementations of assumptions 0, 1, and 2;Cladistics 16 319–345Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Van Veller M G P, Kornet D J and Zandee M 2002 A posteriori and a priori methodologies for testing hypotheses of causal processes in vicariance biogeography;Cladistics 18 207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Van Veller M G P, Zandee M and Kornet D J 2001 Measures for obtaining inclusive sets of area cladograms under assumptions zero, 1, and 2 with different methods for vicariance biogeography;Cladistics 17 248–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Van Veller M G P, Zandee M and Kornet D J 1999 Two requirements for obtaining valid common patterns under different assumptions in vicariance biogeography;Cladistics 15 393–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Voelker G 1999 Dispersal, vicariance, and clocks: historical biogeography and speciation in a cosmopolitan passerine Genus (Anthus: Motacillidae);Evolution 53 1536–1552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Wakeley J 2004 Inferences about the structure and history of populations: coalescents and intraspecific phylogeography; inThe evolution of population biology (eds) R S Singh and M K Uyenoyama (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) pp 193–215Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Zandee M and Roos M C 1987 Component-compatibility in historical biogeography;Cladistics 3 305–332Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Deptartment of Biological SciencesGeorge Washington UniversityWashington DCUSA
  2. 2.Section of Integrative BiologyUniversity of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations