The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inferring dispersal: a Bayesian approach to phylogeny‐based island biogeography, with special reference to the Canary Islands
Open accessAbstract
Aim Oceanic islands represent a special challenge to historical biogeographers because dispersal is typically the dominant process while most existing methods are based on vicariance. Here, we describe a new Bayesian approach to island biogeography that estimates island carrying capacities and dispersal rates based on simple Markov models of biogeographical processes. This is done in the context of simultaneous analysis of phylogenetic and distributional data across groups, accommodating phylogenetic uncertainty and making parameter estimates more robust. We test our models on an empirical data set of published phylogenies of Canary Island organisms to examine overall dispersal rates and correlation of rates with explanatory factors such as geographic proximity and area size. Location Oceanic archipelagos with special reference to the Atlantic Canary Islands. Methods The Canary Islands were divided into three island‐groups, corresponding to the main magmatism periods in the formation of the archipelago, while non‐Canarian distributions were grouped into a fourth ‘mainland‐island’. Dispersal between island groups, which were assumed constant through time, was modelled as a homogeneous, time‐reversible Markov process, analogous to the standard models of DNA evolution. The stationary state frequencies in these models reflect the relative carrying capacity of the islands, while the exchangeability (rate) parameters reflect the relative dispersal rates between islands. We examined models of increasing complexity: Jukes–Cantor (JC), Equal‐in, and General Time Reversible (GTR), with or without the assumption of stepping‐stone dispersal. The data consisted of 13 Canarian phylogenies: 954 individuals representing 393 taxonomic (morphological) entities. Each group was allowed to evolve under its own DNA model, with the island‐model shared across groups. Posterior distributions on island model parameters were estimated using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling, as implemented in MrBayes 4.0, and Bayes Factors were used to compare models. Results The Equal‐in step, the GTR, and the GTR step dispersal models showed the best fit to the data. In the Equal‐in and GTR models, the largest carrying capacity was estimated for the mainland, followed by the central islands and the western islands, with the eastern islands having the smallest carrying capacity. The relative dispersal rate was highest between the central and eastern islands, and between the central and western islands. The exchange with the mainland was rare in comparison. Main conclusions Our results confirm those of earlier studies suggesting that inter‐island dispersal within the Canary Island archipelago has been more important in explaining diversification within lineages than dispersal between the continent and the islands, despite the close proximity to North Africa. The low carrying capacity of the eastern islands, uncorrelated with their size or age, fits well with the idea of a historically depauperate biota in these islands but more sophisticated models are needed to address the possible influence of major recent extinction events. The island models explored here can easily be extended to address other problems in historical biogeography, such as dispersal among areas in continental settings or reticulate area relationships.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach.
Felsenstein, J. (1981) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf01734359 · Cited by 14,571
Evolution of Protein Molecules
JUKES, T. H., & CANTOR, C. R. (1969) · Mammalian Protein Metabolism · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-3211-9.50009-7 · Cited by 11,032
A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data
Lewis, P. O. (2001) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/106351501753462876 · Cited by 2,929
Cited by
Biogeography of the Indo-Australian Archipelago
Lohman, D. J., de Bruyn, M., Page, T., von Rintelen, K., Hall, R., Ng, P. K. L., Shih, H.-T., Carvalho, G. R., & von Rintelen, T. (2011) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102710-145001 · Cited by 580
Bayesian Evolutionary Analysis with BEAST
Drummond, A. J., & Bouckaert, R. R. (2015) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139095112 · Cited by 527
Phylogenetic Inference of Reciprocal Effects between Geographic Range Evolution and Diversification
Goldberg, E. E., Lancaster, L. T., & Ree, R. H. (2011) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syr046 · Cited by 425
Hypothesis testing in biogeography
Crisp, M. D., Trewick, S. A., & Cook, L. G. (2011) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2010.11.005 · Cited by 342
Drummond, C. S., Eastwood, R. J., Miotto, S. T. S., & Hughes, C. E. (2012) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syr126 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Sanmartín, I., Van Der Mark, P., & Ronquist, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Biogeography
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-02-12
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 428-449
- ISSN
- 0305-0270 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2699
- OpenAlex
- W2157389871
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 15.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inferring dispersal: a Bayesian approach to phylogeny‐based island biogeography, with special reference to the Canary Islands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01885.x
- The paper
- Sanmartín, I., Van Der Mark, P., & Ronquist, F. (2008). Inferring dispersal: a Bayesian approach to phylogeny‐based island biogeography, with special reference to the Canary Islands. Journal of Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01885.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.