Dataset Information

How (much) do flowers vary? Unbalanced disparity among flower functional modules and a mosaic pattern of morphospace occupation in the order Ericales.

ABSTRACT: The staggering diversity of angiosperms and their flowers has fascinated scientists for centuries. However, the quantitative distribution of floral morphological diversity (disparity) among lineages and the relative contribution of functional modules (perianth, androecium and gynoecium) to total floral disparity have rarely been addressed. Focusing on a major angiosperm order (Ericales), we compiled a dataset of 37 floral traits scored for 381 extant species and nine fossils. We conducted morphospace analyses to explore phylogenetic, temporal and functional patterns of disparity. We found that the floral morphospace is organized as a continuous cloud in which most clades occupy distinct regions in a mosaic pattern, that disparity increases with clade size rather than age, and that fossils fall in a narrow portion of the space. Surprisingly, our study also revealed that among functional modules, it is the androecium that contributes most to total floral disparity in Ericales. We discuss our findings in the light of clade history, selective regimes as well as developmental and functional constraints acting on the evolution of the flower and thereby demonstrate that quantitative analyses such as the ones used here are a powerful tool to gain novel insights into the evolution and diversity of flowers.

SUBMITTER: Chartier M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5394665 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How (much) do flowers vary? Unbalanced disparity among flower functional modules and a mosaic pattern of morphospace occupation in the order Ericales.

Chartier Marion M Löfstrand Stefan S von Balthazar Maria M Gerber Sylvain S Jabbour Florian F Sauquet Hervé H Schönenberger Jürg J

Proceedings. Biological sciences 20170401 1852

The staggering diversity of angiosperms and their flowers has fascinated scientists for centuries. However, the quantitative distribution of floral morphological diversity (disparity) among lineages and the relative contribution of functional modules (perianth, androecium and gynoecium) to total floral disparity have rarely been addressed. Focusing on a major angiosperm order (Ericales), we compiled a dataset of 37 floral traits scored for 381 extant species and nine fossils. We conducted morpho ...[more]

PMID: 28381623

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFishes are extremely speciose and also highly disparate in their fin configurations, more specifically in the number of fins present as well as their structure, shape, and size. How they achieved this remarkable disparity is difficult to explain in the absence of any comprehensive overview of the evolutionary history of fish appendages. Fin modularity could provide an explanation for both the observed disparity in fin configurations and the sequential appearance of new fins. Modularity is considered as an important prerequisite for the evolvability of living systems, enabling individual modules to be optimized without interfering with others. Similarities in developmental patterns between some of the fins already suggest that they form developmental modules during ontogeny. At a macroevolutionary scale, these developmental modules could act as evolutionary units of change and contribute to the disparity in fin configurations. This study addresses fin disparity in a phylogenetic perspective, while focusing on the presence/absence and number of each of the median and paired fins.ResultsPatterns of fin morphological disparity were assessed by mapping fin characters on a new phylogenetic supertree of fish orders. Among agnathans, disparity in fin configurations results from the sequential appearance of novel fins forming various combinations. Both median and paired fins would have appeared first as elongated ribbon-like structures, which were the precursors for more constricted appendages. Among chondrichthyans, disparity in fin configurations relates mostly to median fin losses. Among actinopterygians, fin disparity involves fin losses, the addition of novel fins (e.g., the adipose fin), and coordinated duplications of the dorsal and anal fins. Furthermore, some pairs of fins, notably the dorsal/anal and pectoral/pelvic fins, show non-independence in their character distribution, supporting expectations based on developmental and morphological evidence that these fin pairs form evolutionary modules.ConclusionsOur results suggest that the pectoral/pelvic fins and the dorsal/anal fins form two distinct evolutionary modules, and that the latter is nested within a more inclusive median fins module. Because the modularity hypotheses that we are testing are also supported by developmental and variational data, this constitutes a striking example linking developmental, variational, and evolutionary modules.

Project description:Flowers come in a variety of colours, shapes, sizes and odours. Flowers also differ in the quality and quantity of nutritional reward they provide to entice potential pollinators to visit. Given this diversity, generalist flower-visiting insects face the considerable challenge of deciding which flowers to feed on and which to ignore. Working with real flowers poses logistical challenges due to correlations between flower traits, maintenance costs and uncontrolled variables. Here, we overcome this challenge by designing multimodal artificial flowers that varied in visual, olfactory and reward attributes. We used artificial flowers to investigate the impact of seven floral attributes (three visual cues, two olfactory cues and two rewarding attributes) on flower visitation and species richness. We investigated how flower attributes influenced two phases of the decision-making process: the decision to land on a flower, and the decision to feed on a flower. Artificial flowers attracted 890 individual insects representing 15 morphospecies spanning seven arthropod orders. Honeybees were the most common visitors accounting for 46% of visitors. Higher visitation rates were driven by the presence of nectar, the presence of linalool, flower shape and flower colour and was negatively impacted by the presence of citral. Species richness was driven by the presence of nectar, the presence of linalool and flower colour. For hymenopterans, the probability of landing on the artificial flowers was influenced by the presence of nectar or pollen, shape and the presence of citral and/or linalool. The probability of feeding increased when flowers contained nectar. For dipterans, the probability of landing on artificial flowers increased when the flower was yellow and contained linalool. The probability of feeding increased when flowers contained pollen, nectar and linalool. Our results demonstrate the multi-attribute nature of flower preferences and highlight the usefulness of artificial flowers as tools for studying flower visitation in wild insects.

Project description:Interaction networks are sensitive to elevation gradients through changes in local distribution of interacting partners. Here, we use plant-pollinator interaction network metrics to assess the effect of elevation on flowers and flower-visiting insect assemblages on a sentinel mountain used for monitoring climate change in the flower- and insect-rich Cape Floristic Region. We also use these interaction metrics to explain the effect of environmental factors on the interaction networks. We did this over four vegetation zones <1640m asl, as determined by former botanical studies. Overall, bees were the dominant flower visitors, followed by monkey beetles, and far behind were wasps and flies. The middle elevation zone (650-744 m a.s.l), which is also an ecotone between two distinct botanical zones, had the highest species richness and abundance of interacting plants and insects. Interaction frequency and size of network were also greatest in the middle zone, as were network diversity, generality, and linkage density, while lowest in the peak zone. In sum, there was distinct elevation zoning of flower-visiting insects. The greatest zonal change was between species at the middle compared with peak zone. Large-sized monkey beetles, bees and flies characterized the unique assemblage in the peak zone (1576-1640 m a.s.l.). The insect zonation tracked that of plant assemblages, with air temperature (lapse rate) being the primary driver of bee distribution, with lowest levels in the peak zone. In contrast, beetle distribution was driven mostly by flower assemblages as well as air temperature. In turn, wasp and fly interaction networks were not affected by any of the measured environmental variables. We conclude that increased elevation stress from reduced temperatures, changing abiotic weather conditions (e.g. strong winds at high elevations),and decline in flowering plant composition causes breakdown of interaction networks involving bees and beetles but not that of flies and wasps.

Dataset Information

How (much) do flowers vary? Unbalanced disparity among flower functional modules and a mosaic pattern of morphospace occupation in the order Ericales.

Publications

How (much) do flowers vary? Unbalanced disparity among flower functional modules and a mosaic pattern of morphospace occupation in the order Ericales.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets