Cited by 300Evolution and Paleontology StudiesMorphological variations and asymmetryEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

SURFACE : detecting convergent evolution from comparative data by fitting Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck models with stepwise Akaike Information Criterion

Open access
Ingram, Travis, Mahler, D.Luke·2013·Methods in Ecology and Evolution

Abstract

Summary: We present a method, ‘ SURFACE ’, that uses the Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck stabilizing selection model to identify cases of convergent evolution using only continuous phenotypic characters and a phylogenetic tree. SURFACE uses stepwise Akaike Information Criterion first to locate regime shifts on a tree, then to identify whether shifts are towards convergent regimes. Simulations can be used to test the hypothesis that a clade contains more convergence than expected by chance. We demonstrate the method with an application to Hawaiian Tetragnatha spiders, and present numerical simulations showing that the method has desirable statistical properties given data for multiple traits. The r package surface is available as open source software from the Comprehensive R Archive Network.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/2041-210x.12034

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tests of adaptive evolution come in two flavors: those with an a priori hypothesis about which lineages belong to which regimes, and those where the locations of regime changes are estimated along with the parameters of the OU process.

    “Tests of adaptive evolution come in two flavors: those with an a priori hypothesis (or hypotheses) regarding which lineages belong to which distinct regimes based on ancestral state reconstruction of explanatory factors (Butler and King 2004;Beaulieu et al. 2012) and those where the locations of regime changes are themselves estimated along with the parameters of the OU process (Ingram and Mahler”

    From Rethinking phylogenetic comparative methods (2018) · cites this paper as Ingram and Mahler 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Alfaro, M.E., Santini, F., Brock, C., Alamillo, H., Dornburg, A., Rabosky, D.L., Carnevale, G. & Harmon, L.J. (2009) Nine exceptional radiations plus high turnover explain species diversity in jawed vertebrates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 106, 13410-13414.
  2. Blackledge, T.A. & Gillespie, R.G. (2004) Convergent evolution of behavior in an adaptive radiation of Hawaiian web-building spiders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 101, 16228-16233.
  3. Felsenstein, J. (1988) Phylogenies and quantitative characters. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 19, 445-471.
  4. Gillespie, R.G., Croom, H.B. & Palumbi, S.R. (1994) Multiple origins of a spider radiation in Hawaii. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 91, 2290-2294.
  5. Hansen, T.F. (2012) Adaptive landscapes and macroevolutionary dynamics. The Adaptive Landscape in Evolutionary Biology (eds. E. Svensson & R. Calsbeek), pp. 205-226. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
  6. Harvey, P.H. & Pagel, M.D. (1991) The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
  7. Losos, J. (2009) Lizards in an Evolutionary Tree: Ecology and Adaptive Radiation of Anoles. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
  8. Moore, B.R. & Chan, K.M.A. (2004) Detecting diversification rate variation in supertrees. Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (ed. O.R.P. Bininda-Emonds), pp. 487-533. Kluwer Academic, Dordr- echt, The Netherlands.
  9. Simpson, G.G. (1953) The Major Features of Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York, NY.
  10. Stayton, C.T. (2008) Is convergence surprising? An examination of the fre- quency of convergence in simulated datasets. Journal of Theoretical Biol- ogy, 252, 1-14.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ingram, T., & Mahler, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Ingram, Travis
Venue
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03
Volume
4
Issue
5
Pages
416-425
ISSN
2041-210X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2103516605
Cited by
300
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 3
FWCI
17.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Methods in Ecology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Harvard University
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Geometry and Topology › Morphological variations and asymmetry
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
convergent evolution, Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, stabilizing selection, tipping points, phylogenetic comparative analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review