example 1 example 2 does it work? testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

33
or or or = ancestor descendants ? Down pass Up pass (if needed)

Upload: xavier-skinner

Post on 28-Mar-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

or

or

or

=

ancestor

descendants

?

Down pass

Up pass (if needed)

Page 2: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Example 1

Example 2

Page 3: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Does it work?

Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Page 4: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

J MR K L N Q O P

A B C D

E F

W

15 16

7 16

9 15 11 21 22 16

19 18

1817

34

wild-type T740 serial lysates2/3 generations per lysate

T7 bacteriophage in presence of N-methyl-N’ -n itro-N-n itroguanidine

Experimental phylogenetics

Page 5: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Comparing actual ancestors with inferred ancestors

Parsimony got it 94% right

Page 6: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Two cases where

parsimony got it wrong

- -- - - - - + -

- - - +

- -

-

- -- - - + + + +

- - + +

- -

-

Bgl II

Mbo I

Page 7: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Catalytic activity

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

50 42 38 30 25 20 15 12 8

Time (millions of years)

Jurassic Park revisited

Recreating ancestral proteins

Page 8: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Taxonomic sampling and missed changes

-

+ +

+

- -

--

-

-

2 changes 1 change no changes

actual reconstructed (without a taxon)

Page 9: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Problem is acute on long branches, especially for molecular data

A

T

T T

A

G

G

GG

A

Page 10: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Molecular trees are often imbalanced

Page 11: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

How do characters evolve?

Page 12: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Ordered characterFused, size 1

Touching

Separate

Fused, size 2

Page 13: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Unordered character

Fused, size 1

TouchingSeparate

Fused, size 2

Page 14: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Dollo parsimony“once lost, complex structures are never regained”

1

0

1

0

Standard parsimony Dollo parsimony

commononce only

Page 15: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Wing loss and gain in stick insectsWhiting M. F. et al. Nature 421, 264-267 (2003)

Page 16: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory
Page 17: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Testing hypotheses

• When did a character evolve?

• Has it evolved more than once?

• Did one character evolve before another?

• Is the evolution of two (or more) characters correlated?

Page 18: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Swordtails and platys

Page 19: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Origin of swords in swordtail fishes:the “pre-existing bias hypothesis”

Idea:

Females evolve a “sensory bias” which causes them to prefer males with exaggerated features. Hence, male morphology is driven by sexual selection.

Page 20: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Testing this idea...

• Female choose males based on sword length. Experiments on X. helleri show females prefer males with longer

swords.

• Females of swordless species (platys) prefer males with swords. Experiments on X. maculatus confirm this.

• Absence of swords must be primitive, so that female's bias for swords predates the evolution of swords.

?

Page 21: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Swords are primitive!

X. couchianusX. gordoniX. meyeriX. xiphidiumX. variatusX. evelynaeX. clemenciaeX. milleriX. maculatusX. andersiX. signumX. helleriX. alvereziX. birchmanniX. pygmaeusX. montezumaeX. nezehualcoyotiX. continensX. corteziX. malincheX. nigrensisX. multilineatusP. compressP. intermediaP. olmecae

Page 22: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Correlated evolution

Have two characters evolved together?

Page 23: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Gregariousness in aposematic butterfly larvae

• Aposematic forms tend to be gregarious. R. A. Fisher suggested warning colouration evolved through kin selection.

• An individual may die during the “lesson” that teaches naïve predator not to eat brightly coloured larvae

• If predator leaves kin alone, inclusive fitness of dead larvae is positive

• Laying eggs in clutches will result in kin groups on same plant

• Prediction: aggregation evolves before colouration

Page 24: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Correlated character change

AB

AB

AB

ab

A

B

AB

AB

Ab

ab

A

B

Does character A always arise with character B?Does character A always precede character B?

Page 25: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Prediction based on kin selection

unpalatable

gregarious

unpalatable

gregarious

Page 26: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Results: gregariousness evolves after unpalatability

unpalatable

gregarious

unpalatable

gregarious

Page 27: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Comparative method

Phylogeny makes cross-species comparisons non independent

Page 28: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Species aren’t independent

A

C

B

D

E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

Page 29: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Bird bills vary in size

Page 30: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Lice are a problem for birds

QuickTime™ and aCinepak decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Page 31: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Independent contrasts

Page 32: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Bird with big bills scratch more

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Toucanet/Aracari

Woodpecker/Jacamar

Hornbill/Roller

Hummingbird/Turacos

Curlew/Ruff

Oystercatcher/Avocet

Ibis/Falcon

Stork/New Worldvulture

Pelican/penguin

Proportion of time spent grooming

Long

Short

Page 33: Example 1 Example 2 Does it work? Testing ancestral reconstructions in the laboratory

Summary

• Given a phylogeny we can infer ancestral states

• These states can be used to test hypotheses• Comparisons between species are not

independent• The comparative method provides tools to

extract independent comparisons from a phylolgeny