Loading…

Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading?

The extent to which perceived patterns of evolution are affected by the use of single characters versus overall morphology or measured versus counted and coded characters is explored empirically, employing multiple-character data from closely spaced sequential populations of the Neogene bryozoan Met...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Paleobiology 1987, Vol.13 (3), p.286-296
Main Author: Cheetham, Alan H.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3
container_end_page 296
container_issue 3
container_start_page 286
container_title Paleobiology
container_volume 13
creator Cheetham, Alan H.
description The extent to which perceived patterns of evolution are affected by the use of single characters versus overall morphology or measured versus counted and coded characters is explored empirically, employing multiple-character data from closely spaced sequential populations of the Neogene bryozoan Metrarabdotos. In all nine species examined, the pattern of evolution in overall morphology revealed by discriminant analysis is so highly punctuated that changes within species do not vary significantly from zero. Among the 46 single characters in the nine species, a few statistically significant temporal trends do occur, as apparent departures from the static pattern in overall morphology. However, these exceptions are so poorly related to the morphology that distinguishes inferred ancestor and descendant species from each other, and are so few in number, that they can be interpreted as chance variation from a general condition of no change within species. There is no difference in behavior between measured characters and counted or coded ones, in part because the distinction between the two types of characters can be artificial in bryozoans and other modular organisms. The results suggest that interpretation of single-character changes, in isolation rather than as statistical samples of the change in overall morphology, should be made with caution.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0094837300008873
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1017_S0094837300008873</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0094837300008873</cupid><jstor_id>2400731</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>2400731</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kFFLwzAUhYMoOKc_QPAhf6B6kzRp6ovIcCoMfXA-lzS96zraZiSdMH-9KRu-CF643IfvnAP3EHLN4JYBy-4-APJUi0xAHK0zcUImLBc6kUKwUzIZcTLyc3IRwiaKcqmyCTFL7LaOuhXFL9fuhsb1tOmpoW_oauyRln7vvp3p76nxSAePfRVGRWj6ukXaOb9du9bVjaV2bbyxA_pAuya0aKqoebgkZyvTBrw63in5nD8tZy_J4v35dfa4SAxP1ZBYI3lcaZlEVFIo4BUopYUFSFlWaqEwMymwildcgELLUUud21yVIG0lpoQdcq13IXhcFVvfdMbvCwbF2FHxp6PouTl4NmFw_tfAU4BMsIjFMdJ0pW-qGouN2_k-vvFP6A9Px3Kj</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading?</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Cheetham, Alan H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Cheetham, Alan H.</creatorcontrib><description>The extent to which perceived patterns of evolution are affected by the use of single characters versus overall morphology or measured versus counted and coded characters is explored empirically, employing multiple-character data from closely spaced sequential populations of the Neogene bryozoan Metrarabdotos. In all nine species examined, the pattern of evolution in overall morphology revealed by discriminant analysis is so highly punctuated that changes within species do not vary significantly from zero. Among the 46 single characters in the nine species, a few statistically significant temporal trends do occur, as apparent departures from the static pattern in overall morphology. However, these exceptions are so poorly related to the morphology that distinguishes inferred ancestor and descendant species from each other, and are so few in number, that they can be interpreted as chance variation from a general condition of no change within species. There is no difference in behavior between measured characters and counted or coded ones, in part because the distinction between the two types of characters can be artificial in bryozoans and other modular organisms. The results suggest that interpretation of single-character changes, in isolation rather than as statistical samples of the change in overall morphology, should be made with caution.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-8373</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-5331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0094837300008873</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Autocorrelation ; Biological taxonomies ; Cladistics ; Descendants ; Discriminant analysis ; Discriminants ; Evolution ; Paleobiology ; Plant morphology ; Species</subject><ispartof>Paleobiology, 1987, Vol.13 (3), p.286-296</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Paleontological Society</rights><rights>Copyright 1987 The Paleontological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2400731$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2400731$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4024,27923,27924,27925,58238,58471</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cheetham, Alan H.</creatorcontrib><title>Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading?</title><title>Paleobiology</title><addtitle>Paleobiology</addtitle><description>The extent to which perceived patterns of evolution are affected by the use of single characters versus overall morphology or measured versus counted and coded characters is explored empirically, employing multiple-character data from closely spaced sequential populations of the Neogene bryozoan Metrarabdotos. In all nine species examined, the pattern of evolution in overall morphology revealed by discriminant analysis is so highly punctuated that changes within species do not vary significantly from zero. Among the 46 single characters in the nine species, a few statistically significant temporal trends do occur, as apparent departures from the static pattern in overall morphology. However, these exceptions are so poorly related to the morphology that distinguishes inferred ancestor and descendant species from each other, and are so few in number, that they can be interpreted as chance variation from a general condition of no change within species. There is no difference in behavior between measured characters and counted or coded ones, in part because the distinction between the two types of characters can be artificial in bryozoans and other modular organisms. The results suggest that interpretation of single-character changes, in isolation rather than as statistical samples of the change in overall morphology, should be made with caution.</description><subject>Autocorrelation</subject><subject>Biological taxonomies</subject><subject>Cladistics</subject><subject>Descendants</subject><subject>Discriminant analysis</subject><subject>Discriminants</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Paleobiology</subject><subject>Plant morphology</subject><subject>Species</subject><issn>0094-8373</issn><issn>1938-5331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1987</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kFFLwzAUhYMoOKc_QPAhf6B6kzRp6ovIcCoMfXA-lzS96zraZiSdMH-9KRu-CF643IfvnAP3EHLN4JYBy-4-APJUi0xAHK0zcUImLBc6kUKwUzIZcTLyc3IRwiaKcqmyCTFL7LaOuhXFL9fuhsb1tOmpoW_oauyRln7vvp3p76nxSAePfRVGRWj6ukXaOb9du9bVjaV2bbyxA_pAuya0aKqoebgkZyvTBrw63in5nD8tZy_J4v35dfa4SAxP1ZBYI3lcaZlEVFIo4BUopYUFSFlWaqEwMymwildcgELLUUud21yVIG0lpoQdcq13IXhcFVvfdMbvCwbF2FHxp6PouTl4NmFw_tfAU4BMsIjFMdJ0pW-qGouN2_k-vvFP6A9Px3Kj</recordid><startdate>1987</startdate><enddate>1987</enddate><creator>Cheetham, Alan H.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Paleontological Society</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1987</creationdate><title>Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading?</title><author>Cheetham, Alan H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1987</creationdate><topic>Autocorrelation</topic><topic>Biological taxonomies</topic><topic>Cladistics</topic><topic>Descendants</topic><topic>Discriminant analysis</topic><topic>Discriminants</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Paleobiology</topic><topic>Plant morphology</topic><topic>Species</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cheetham, Alan H.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Paleobiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cheetham, Alan H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading?</atitle><jtitle>Paleobiology</jtitle><addtitle>Paleobiology</addtitle><date>1987</date><risdate>1987</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>286</spage><epage>296</epage><pages>286-296</pages><issn>0094-8373</issn><eissn>1938-5331</eissn><abstract>The extent to which perceived patterns of evolution are affected by the use of single characters versus overall morphology or measured versus counted and coded characters is explored empirically, employing multiple-character data from closely spaced sequential populations of the Neogene bryozoan Metrarabdotos. In all nine species examined, the pattern of evolution in overall morphology revealed by discriminant analysis is so highly punctuated that changes within species do not vary significantly from zero. Among the 46 single characters in the nine species, a few statistically significant temporal trends do occur, as apparent departures from the static pattern in overall morphology. However, these exceptions are so poorly related to the morphology that distinguishes inferred ancestor and descendant species from each other, and are so few in number, that they can be interpreted as chance variation from a general condition of no change within species. There is no difference in behavior between measured characters and counted or coded ones, in part because the distinction between the two types of characters can be artificial in bryozoans and other modular organisms. The results suggest that interpretation of single-character changes, in isolation rather than as statistical samples of the change in overall morphology, should be made with caution.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0094837300008873</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0094-8373
ispartof Paleobiology, 1987, Vol.13 (3), p.286-296
issn 0094-8373
1938-5331
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1017_S0094837300008873
source JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects Autocorrelation
Biological taxonomies
Cladistics
Descendants
Discriminant analysis
Discriminants
Evolution
Paleobiology
Plant morphology
Species
title Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: are trends in single morphologic characters misleading?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T06%3A45%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tempo%20of%20evolution%20in%20a%20Neogene%20bryozoan:%20are%20trends%20in%20single%20morphologic%20characters%20misleading?&rft.jtitle=Paleobiology&rft.au=Cheetham,%20Alan%20H.&rft.date=1987&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=286&rft.epage=296&rft.pages=286-296&rft.issn=0094-8373&rft.eissn=1938-5331&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0094837300008873&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E2400731%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a246t-ca52ca55c15ee653602d06683c00417b836e7a401d2d2306ec2e8589c96b05cd3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0094837300008873&rft_jstor_id=2400731&rfr_iscdi=true