Cited by 57Morphological variations and asymmetryEvolution and Paleontology StudiesComparative Animal Anatomy Studies

Unravelling intravertebral integration, modularity and disparity in Felidae (Mammalia)

Open access
Randau, Marcela, Goswami, Anjali·2017·Evolution & Development

Abstract

SUMMARY: Morphological integration and modularity, which describe the relationships among morphological attributes and reflect genetic, developmental, and functional interactions, have been hypothesized to be major influences on trait responses to selection and thus morphological evolution. The mammalian presacral vertebral column shows little variation in vertebral count and therefore specialization for function occurs primarily through modification of vertebral shape. However, vertebral shape has been suggested to be under strong control from developmental canalization, although this has never been explicitly tested. Here, we assess hypotheses of developmental modules in the vertebrae of felids to determine whether developmental interactions are a primary influence on vertebral modularity. Additionally, we analyze the magnitudes of both intravertebral integration and disparity to evaluate if level of integration varies along the vertebral column and, if so, whether integration and disparity are associated. Our results confirm the hypothesis of vertebral developmental modularity, with most presacral vertebrae displaying two modules. Exceptions are concentrated in the boundaries among traditional and functional regions, suggesting that intravertebral modularity may reflect larger‐scale modularity of the felid vertebral column. We further demonstrate that overall integration and disparity are highest in posterior vertebrae, thus providing an empirical example of integration potentially promoting greater morphological responses to selection.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ede.12218

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The pattern of high integration associated with low evolutionary rates and low disparity may not represent a general property of phenotypic integration, as the strength of within-module correlation is positively correlated with disparity in other systems.

    “However, this pattern may not represent a general property of phenotypic integration as the strength of within-module correlation is positively correlated with disparity in other systems (16).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Randau, M., & Goswami, A.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Randau, Marcela
Venue
Evolution & Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-02-17
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
85-95
ISSN
  • 1520-541X (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-142X
OpenAlex
W2615000196
Cited by
57
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
FWCI
11.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Evolution & Development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
SYNTHESYS Project
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Geometry and Topology › Morphological variations and asymmetry
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Comparative Animal Anatomy Studies
Keywords
morphological integration, modularity, disparity, Felidae, spine, presacral vertebrae, vertebral shape, developmental canalization, developmental modules, morphological evolution
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Evolution, Mammals, Phylogeny, Selection, Genetic, Spine, Felidae

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