Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32620878›Full record

ArticleNature communications2020

Megaevolutionary dynamics and the timing of evolutionary innovation in reptiles.

Tiago R Simões, Oksana Vernygora, Michael W Caldwell, Stephanie E Pierce

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tiago R SimõesDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology & Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA. tsimoes@fas.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4716-649X
Oksana VernygoraDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E9, Canada.
Michael W CaldwellDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2377-3925
Stephanie E PierceDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology & Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0717-1841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The origin of phenotypic diversity among higher clades is one of the most fundamental topics in evolutionary biology. However, due to methodological challenges, few studies have assessed rates of evolution and phenotypic disparity across broad scales of time to understand the evolutionary dynamics behind the origin and early evolution of new clades. Here, we provide a total-evidence dating approach to this problem in diapsid reptiles. We find major chronological gaps between periods of high evolutionary rates (phenotypic and molecular) and expansion in phenotypic disparity in reptile evolution. Importantly, many instances of accelerated phenotypic evolution are detected at the origin of major clades and body plans, but not concurrent with previously proposed periods of adaptive radiation. Furthermore, strongly heterogenic rates of evolution mark the acquisition of similarly adapted functional types, and the origin of snakes is marked by the highest rates of phenotypic evolution in diapsid history.

Indexed as

Animal DistributionFossilsGenetic VariationAnimalsEvolution, MolecularGeographyPhylogenyPopulation DynamicsReptilesSpecies SpecificityTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID32620878
PMCPMC7335191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.