Russian Journal of Theriology. Main page    

Russian Journal of Theriology. Главная страница
Доступ к статьям
Электронная подача статей, правила для авторов и тп
Вход для рецензентов
Здесь можно подписаться на новостную рассылку RJT
Контактная информация

English version

Craniometry of mountain voles of the genus Alticola (Rodentia: Arvicolinae): Orthogonal decomposition of multivariate variability into intra- and interspecific components
Kovaleva V.Y., Efimov V.M., Moroldoev I.V., Litvinov Y.N.
P. 32-43
In the analysis of quantitative traits within a genus, distinguishing between intra- and interspecific variability is crucial. This study aimed to separate and compare these two components of diversity in the skull morphology of mountain voles. Using Fisher’s method, we performed an orthogonal decomposition of a craniometric data matrix from 12 species and subspecies of the genus Alticola (311 specimens, 15 traits). We created two statistically independent matrices: one representing interspecific variation (differences between species’ weighted centroids) and another representing pooled intraspecific variation (the combined within-group variability). The total variance of the original data was partitioned entirely between these two new matrices. The interspecific component accounted for 44.32% of the total variance, while the intraspecific component accounted for the remaining 55.68%. For each matrix, we computed principal components, which were interpreted as structural-functional modules. The analysis revealed that the first principal component in all cases represented general size-age variability, while the second and third components captured shape variation in the skull and mandible. However, the overall modular structure differed significantly between the interspecific and intraspecific levels. The main finding was that the integration of traits from the facial and cerebral parts of the skull, and mandible was only observed in the interspecific matrix. This suggests that the phenotypic patterns driving divergence between species are distinct from the patterns of variation within species. We propose that this difference may be due to differing rates and mechanisms of epigenetic and genetic restructuring of the phenotype operating at these separate evolutionary levels.

DOI: 10.15298/rusjtheriol.25.1.05

Литература

  • Arnaudo M.E., Toledo N., Soibelzon L. & Bona P. 2019. Phylogenetic signal analysis in the basicranium of Ursidae (Carnivora, Mammalia) // PeerJ. Vol.7. Art.e6597. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.6597

  • Belyaev D.K. & Trut L.N. 1989. [Convergent morphogenesis and the theory of destabilizing selection] // Shumnyi V.K. (ed.). [Vavilov’s Legacy in Modern Biology]. Moscow: Nauka. P.155–169 [in Russian].

  • Cardini A. & Elton S. 2008. Does the skull carry a phylogenetic signal? Evolution and modularity in the guenons // Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. Vol.93. No.4. P.813–834. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.01011.x

  • Darroch J.N. & Mosimann J.E. 1985. Canonical and principal components of shape // Biometrika. Vol.72. No.2. P.241–252.

  • Esteve-Altava B. 2017. In search of morphological modules: a systematic review // Biological Reviews. Vol.92. No.3. P.1332–1347. DOI: 10.1111/brv.12284

  • Fisher R.A. 1918. XV. The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance // Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Vol.52. No.2. P.399−433.

  • Fisher R.A. 1936. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems // Annals of Eugenics. Vol.7. P.179−188.

  • Fostowicz-Frelik Ł. & Tseng Z.J. 2023. The mammalian skull: development, structure and function // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Vol.378. No.1880. Art.20220077. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0077

  • Goswami A., Noirault E., Coombs E.J., Clavel J., Fabre A.C., Halliday T.J., Churchill M., Curtis A., Watanabe A., Simmons N.B., Beatty B.L., Geisler J.H., Fox D.L. & Felice R.N. 2023. Developmental origin underlies evolutionary rate variation across the placental skull // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Vol.378. No.1880. Art.20220083. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0083

  • Goswami A. & Polly P.D. 2010. The influence of modularity on cranial morphological disparity in Carnivora and Primates (Mammalia) // PloS One. Vol.5. No.3. Art.e9517. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009517

  • Goswami A., Smaers J.B., Soligo C. & Polly P.D. 2014. The macroevolutionary consequences of phenotypic integration: from development to deep time // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Vol.369. No.1649. Art.20130254. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0254

  • Hall B.K. & Hanken J. 2023. Modularity, homology, heterochrony: Gavin de Beer

  • Hallgrímsson B., Lieberman D.E., Liu W., Ford-Hutchinson A.F. & Jirik F.R. 2007. Epigenetic interactions and the structure of phenotypic variation in the cranium // Evolution & Development. Vol.9. No.1. P.76–91. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2006.00139.x

  • Hammer Ø., Harper D.A.T. & Ryan P.D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis // Palaeontologia Electronica. Vol.4. No.1. P.9.

  • Hotelling H. 1936. Relations between two sets of variates // Biometrika. Vol.28. No.3/4. P.321–377.

  • Johnsson M., Henriksen R. & Wright D. 2021. The neural crest cell hypothesis: no unified explanation for domestication // Genetics. Vol.219. No.1. Art.iyab097. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab097

  • Klingenberg C.P. 1996. Multivariate allometry // Marcus L.F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G.J.P. & Slice D.E. (eds.). Advances in morphometrics. New York: Plenum Press. P.23–49. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4757-9083-2_3

  • Klingenberg C.P. 2014. Studying morphological integration and modularity at multiple levels: concepts and analysis // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Vol.369. No.1649. Art.20130249. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0249

  • Kovaleva V.Yu., Litvinov Yu.N. & Efimov V.M. 2014. Shrews (Soricidae, Eulipotyphla) from the Far East and Siberia: combination and search for congruence of molecular genetic and morphological data // Biology Bulletin. Vol.41. No.7. P.575–588. DOI: 10.1134/S106235901407005X

  • Kovaleva V.Yu., Moroldoev I.V., Litvinov Yu.N., Efimov K.V. & Efimov V.M. 2024. Main directions and factors determining the variability of Cytb amino acid sequences in mountain voles (Alticola, Rodentia, and Arvicolinae) // Contemporary Problems of Ecology. Vol.17. No.5. P.645–655. DOI: 10.15372/SEJ20240507

  • Koyabu D. 2023. Evolution, conservatism and overlooked homologies of the mammalian skull // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Vol.378. No.1880. Art.20220081. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0081

  • Koyabu D., Werneburg I., Morimoto N., Zollikofer C.P., Forasiepi A.M., Endo H., Kimura J., Ohdachi S.D., Son N.T. & Sánchez-Villagra M.R. 2014. Mammalian skull heterochrony reveals modular evolution and a link between cranial development and brain size // Nature Communications. Vol.3625. No.5. P.3625. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0081

  • Kryštufek B. & Shenbrot G. 2022. Voles and Lemmings (Arvicolinae) of the Palaearctic Region. Maribor: University Press. 449 p. DOI: 10.18690/um.fnm.2.2022

  • Kyomen S., Murillo-Rincón A.P. & Kaucká M. 2023. Evolutionary mechanisms modulating the mammalian skull development // Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. Vol.378. No.1880. Art.20220080. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0080

  • Magwene P.M. 2006. Integration and modularity in biological system: a review // Acta Zoologica Sinica. Vol.52. P.490–493.

  • Markel’ A.L. 2008. [Stress and evolution] // Vestnik VOGIS. Vol.12. No.1/2. P.206–215 [in Russian].

  • Mitteroecker P. & Schaefer K. 2022. Thirty years of geometric morphometrics: Achievements, challenges, and the ongoing quest for biological meaningfulness // American Journal of Biological Anthropology. Vol.178. P.181–210. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.24531

  • Mosimann J.E. 1970. Size allometry: size and shape variables with characterizations of the lognormal and generalized gamma distributions // Journal of the American Statistical Association. Vol.65. No.330. P.930–945. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1970.10481136

  • Narkevich A.N., Vinogradov K.A. & Grzhibovskij A.M. 2020. Multiple comparisons in biomedical research: the problem and solutions // Ehkologiya Cheloveka. Vol.27. No.10. P.55–64 [in Russian]. DOI: 10.33396/1728-0869-2020-10-55-64

  • Polunin D., Shtaiger I. & Efimov V. 2019. JACOBI4 software for multivariate analysis of biological data // BiOrxiv. Art.803684. DOI: 10.1101/803684

  • Porto A., de Oliveira F.B., Shirai L.T., De Conto V. & Marroig G. 2009. The evolution of modularity in the mammalian skull I: morphological integration patterns and magnitudes // Evolutionary Biology. Vol.36. No.1. P.118–135. DOI: 10.1007/s11692-008-9038-3

  • Rohlf F.J. 2015. The tps series of software // Hystrix. Vol.26. No.1. P.9–12. DOI: 10.4404/hystrix-26.1-11264

  • Rohlf F.J. & Corti M. 2000. Use of two-block partial least-squares to study covariation in shape // Systematic Biology. Vol.49. No.4. P.740–753. DOI: 10.1080/106351500750049806

  • Sherratt E. & Kraatz B. 2023. Multilevel analysis of integration and disparity in the mammalian skull // Evolution. Vol.77. No.4. P.1006–1018. DOI: 10.1093/evolut/qpad020

  • Tang M.K., Jin W., Tang Y., Yan C.C., Murphy R.W., Sun Z.Y., Zhang X.Y., Zeng T., Liao R., Hou Q.F., Yue B.S. & Liu S.Y. 2018. Reassessment of the taxonomic status of Craseomys and three controversial species of Myodes and Alticola (Rodentia: Arvicolinae) // Zootaxa. Vol.4429. No.1. P.1–52. DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4429.1.1.

  • Trapezov O.V. 2007. [Homologous series of fur color variability in the American mink (Mustela vison Schreber, 1777) under domestication conditions] // Vestnik VOGIS. Vol.11. No.3/4. P.547–559 [in Russian].

  • Trut L.N. 2008. [Belyaev’s evolutionary ideas as a conceptual bridge between biology, sociology, and medicine] // Vestnik VOGIS. Vol.12. No.1/2. P.7–18 [in Russian].

  • Ul’yanov A.P. 2020. [Geometry and Algebra for Physics Students: A Study Guide]. Part 2. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk State University. 138 p. [In Russian]

  • Vasil’ev A.G., Faleev V.I., Galaktionov Yu.K., Kovaleva V.Yu., Efimov V.M., Epifanceva L.Yu., Pozdnyakov A.A., Dupal T.A. & Abramov S.A. 2003. [Realization of morphological diversity in natural populations of mammals]. Novosibirsk: Izdatel

  • Wanninger A. 2015. Morphology is dead–long live morphology! Integrating MorphoEvoDevo into molecular EvoDevo and phylogenomics // Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution. Vol.3. P.54. DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2015.00054

  • Wilkins A.S., Wrangham R. & Fitch W.T. 2021. The neural crest/domestication syndrome hypothesis, explained: reply to Johnsson, Henriksen, and Wright // Genetics. Vol.219. No.1. Art.iyab098. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab098

  • Wilks S.S. 1947. Mathematical Statistics. Prinston: Prinston University Press. 282 p.

  • Wold S., Albano C., Dunn W.J., Edlund U., Esbensen K., Geladi P., Hellberg S., Johansson E., Lindberg W. & Sjöström M. 1984. Multivariate data analysis in chemistry // Kowalski B.R. (ed.). Chemometrics. Dordrecht: Springer Dordrecht. P.17–95.

  • Wold S.С., Sjöström M. & Eriksson L. 2001. PLS-regression: a basic tool of chemometrics // Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems. Vol.58. No.2. P.109–130. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-7439(01)00155-1

Скачать PDF