ArticlePloS one2012
Phylogeny-based comparative methods question the adaptive nature of sporophytic specializations in mosses.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Are All Paraphyllia the Same?Frontiers in plant science · 2020Article
- Under which humidity conditions are moss spores released? A comparison between species with perfect and specialized peristomes.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adaptive evolution has often been proposed to explain correlations between habitats and certain phenotypes. In mosses, a high frequency of species with specialized sporophytic traits in exposed or epiphytic habitats was, already 100 years ago, suggested as due to adaptation. We tested this hypothesis by contrasting phylogenetic and morphological data from two moss families, Neckeraceae and Lembophyllaceae, both of which show parallel shifts to a specialized morphology and to exposed epiphytic or epilithic habitats. Phylogeny-based tests for correlated evolution revealed that evolution of four sporophytic traits is correlated with a habitat shift. For three of them, evolutionary rates of dual character-state changes suggest that habitat shifts appear prior to changes in morphology. This suggests that they could have evolved as adaptations to new habitats. Regarding the fourth correlated trait the specialized morphology had already evolved before the habitat shift. In addition, several other specialized "epiphytic" traits show no correlation with a habitat shift. Besides adaptive diversification, other processes thus also affect the match between phenotype and environment. Several potential factors such as complex genetic and developmental pathways yielding the same phenotypes, differences in strength of selection, or constraints in phenotypic evolution may lead to an inability of phylogeny-based comparative methods to detect potential adaptations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.