LOGIN

RSS Facebook Twitter YouTube
GLOSSARY       

SEARCHGLOSSARY

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

PROFILESEARCH

Evolution: Accepted Articles

Home Forums Ichthyology Evolution: Accepted Articles

This topic contains 0 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  Matt 6 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #301503

    Stefan
    Member

    Evolution
    Accepted Article (Accepted, unedited articles published online for future issues)

    TESTING FOR DIFFERENCES IN RATES OF SPECIATION, EXTINCTION, AND MORPHOLOGICAL EVOLUTION IN FOUR TRIBES OF CICHLIDS ENDEMIC TO LAKE TANGANYIKA, EAST AFRICA

    Abstract: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111…1390.x/abstract

    QUOTE
    ABSTRACT
    Patterns of morphological disparity yield important insight into the causes of diversification and adaptive radiation in East African cichlids. However, comparisons of cichlid disparity have often failed to consider the effects that differing clade ages or stochasticity may have on disparity before making interpretations.Here, a model of branching morphological evolution allows assessment of the relative contributions of differing turnover and morphological change rates, clade ages, and stochastic variation to the observed patterns of disparity in four endemic tribes of Lake Tanganyika cichlids. Simulations compare the likelihood of generating the observed disparity of the four tribes using 200 parameter combinations and four model conditioning variations, which allows inference of evolutionary rate differences among clades. The model is generally robust to model conditioning, the approach to data analysis, and model assumptions. Disparity differences among the first three cichlid tribes, Ectodini, Lamprologini, and Tropheini, can be explained entirely by stochasticity and age, whereas the fourth tribe, Cyprichromini, has likely experienced lower rates of turnover and morphological change. This rate difference is likely related to the low dietary diversity of the Cyprichromini. These results highlight the importance of considering both clade age and stochastic variation when interpreting morphological diversity and evolutionary processes.

    #344151

    ender2811
    Participant

    Hey Stefan,
    I have a small favor to ask. Could u maybe take the time to explain to a newb what it is exactly u guys do in this part of the forum. Are u looking for papers or sharing them or just bringing them to the attention of other members?

    #344152

    Stefan
    Member

    Sharing and bringing them to people’s attention so they can get them because they know they are there. When requests are made it’s always pointed out in the threads/posts.

    #344153

    ender2811
    Participant

    KK, thanks.

    #344156

    Stefan
    Member

    You’re welcome. What I’d actually like is to discuss the science here but so far no luck

    #344157

    ender2811
    Participant

    Yea, seems like it.
    Noble effort my friend, don’t give up. Sooner or later some creationists are bound to join the forum. That should sprout up a lively debate nice and quick. Science rocks.

    #344160

    Graham Ramsay
    Participant

    QUOTE (Stefan @ Jun 17 2011, 01:43 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    You’re welcome. What I’d actually like is to discuss the science here but so far no luck
    #344162

    Stefan
    Member

    QUOTE (mummymonkey @ Jun 17 2011, 06:48 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    How can I read the full article Stefan? Difficult to discuss something just from the abstract.

    I was talking about this forum section in general, not about this or any paper in particular.

    #344176

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Anyone want this paper?

    Incidentally, I currently use this forum mostly for getting hold of new papers and am happy with that. If we want to encourage scientific discussion we perhaps need to think about the formatting of it?

    #344181

    Stefan
    Member

    Hmmm, yeah…discussing the science might be too far…

    #344182

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Oh that wasn’t what I meant – just that we should maybe have separate sections for listing new papers and discussion, respectively.

    #344184

    Stefan
    Member

    QUOTE (Matt @ Jun 19 2011, 10:53 PM) < {POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Oh that wasn’t what I meant – just that we should maybe have separate sections for listing new papers and discussion, respectively.
    #344187

    Matt
    Keymaster

    Because under the current format the forum appears to be simply a list of papers and as such may not be immediately recognisable as a scientific discussion forum despite its title.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.