Refine
Year of publication
- 2016 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- biogeography (2) (remove)
Institute
- Institut für Ökologie, Evolution und Diversität (2) (remove)
The use of phylogenies in ecology is increasingly common and has broadened our understanding of biological diversity. Ecological sub-disciplines, particularly conservation, community ecology and macroecology, all recognize the value of evolutionary relationships but the resulting development of phylogenetic approaches has led to a proliferation of phylogenetic diversity metrics. The use of many metrics across the sub-disciplines hampers potential meta-analyses, syntheses, and generalizations of existing results. Further, there is no guide for selecting the appropriate metric for a given question, and different metrics are frequently used to address similar questions. To improve the choice, application, and interpretation of phylo-diversity metrics, we organize existing metrics by expanding on a unifying framework for phylogenetic information.
Generally, questions about phylogenetic relationships within or between assemblages tend to ask three types of question: how much; how different; or how regular? We show that these questions reflect three dimensions of a phylogenetic tree: richness, divergence, and regularity. We classify 70 existing phylo-diversity metrics based on their mathematical form within these three dimensions and identify ‘anchor’ representatives: for α-diversity metrics these are PD (Faith's phylogenetic diversity), MPD (mean pairwise distance), and VPD (variation of pairwise distances). By analysing mathematical formulae and using simulations, we use this framework to identify metrics that mix dimensions, and we provide a guide to choosing and using the most appropriate metrics. We show that metric choice requires connecting the research question with the correct dimension of the framework and that there are logical approaches to selecting and interpreting metrics. The guide outlined herein will help researchers navigate the current jungle of indices.
The genus Thlaspi has been variously subdivided since its description by Linnaeus in 1753, but due to similarities in fruit shape several segregates have still not gained broad recognition, despite the fact that they are not directly related to Thlaspi. This applies especially to segregates now considered to belong to the tribe Coluteocarpeae, which includes several well-studied taxa, e.g., Noccaea caerulescens (syn. Thlaspi caerulescens), and the widespread Microthlaspi perfoliatum (syn. Thlaspi perfoliatum). The taxonomy of this tribe is still debated, as a series of detailed monographs on Coluteocarpeae was not published in English and a lack of phylogenetic resolution within this tribe was found in previous studies. The current study presents detailed phylogenetic investigations and a critical review of morphological features, with focus on taxa previously placed in Microthlaspi. Based on one nuclear (ITS) and two chloroplast (matK, trnL-F) loci, four strongly supported major groups were recovered among the Coluteocarpeae genera included, corresponding to Ihsanalshehbazia gen. nov., Friedrichkarlmeyeria gen. nov., Microthlaspi s.str., and Noccaea s.l. In addition, two new species of Microthlaspi, M. sylvarum-cedri sp. nov. and M. mediterraneo-orientale sp. nov., were discovered, which are well supported by both morphological and molecular data. Furthermore, M. erraticum comb. nov. (diploid) and M. perfoliatum s.str. (polyploid) were shown to be distinct species, phylogenetically widely separate, but with some overlap in several morphological characters. Detailed descriptions, notes on taxonomy, geographical distribution, and line drawings for the new species and each species previously included in Microthlaspi are provided. In addition, the current taxonomic state of the tribe Coluteocarpeae is briefly discussed and it is concluded that while several annual taxa are clearly distinct from Noccaea, many perennial taxa, after thorough phylogenetic and morphological investigations, may have to be merged with this genus.