Population genetics

• Any time colonization or hybridization is involved polymorhpism data will be useful.

Niches

• We kind of sidelined niches a little bit, but we should keep this in mind as we progress toward August.

Talk about planning for the future.

• Data Sets Available
• Groups should indicate somehow which datasets they are interested in using and the datatypes they want to use:
  • Open data conversation

“There’s lots of different kinds of ‘no’“

Speciation/Abundance Breakout Group

• Who’s going to lead this paper? Is it one or two papers?
  • It’s really 2 papers: The empirical paper (Katie), and the modelling paper (Andy)
• Abundance/Area, Abundance/Time, Abundance/Speciation/Range Size
• Katie has some Cichlid data that might be useful for testing this.
• It would be nice to positively construct a hypothesis relating Abundance/Area/Speciation/Range Size that doesn’t just fall out as an emergent property of neutral theory stealing from population genetics theory.

“You steal from popgen and that’s what you get!”

• SGD should be SED, maybe.
• Distribution of ancestral abundances that are distributed in a way that makes sense, rather than uniform.

The Katie paper

• Proposed title: Effect of commonness and rarity on diversification dynamics in radiating clades.
  • Intro: discuss commonness and rarity in response to abundance and range size, and the background of this somewhat with respect to range size but especially the paleo perspective on this.
  • Commonness rarity and range size different quantifications and how they’re related.
  • Connection to theories of abundance and speciation (neutral theory) and connection to empirical work in paleo.
  • “There’s no way to decide without empirical data.”
• For the analyses: HI data, Cichlids, Galapagos gastropods

“I’m good at making paper outlines.”

• Chichlids
  • Maybe abundance, def phylogenies, good popgen data, good information about what lakes each fish is in, and lake-based “Occupancy by fish”

“If you lower your standards and start thinking about ecological things….”

* Is speciation still ongoing?

The Andy Paper

• Don’t want to bring in all the compilcated macroecology/range sizes.
• Neutral theory does capture some aspects of biodiversity but it’s weak on speciation. One assumption that’s weak is the point mutation speciation thing which makes speciation relate directly to population size.

How to bring macroecology back into macroevolution

• Assumptions of Ne as something that messes up phylogenetic inference. If you assume Ne is fixed across species, could this introduce skew in the inference? If Ne was distributed more realistically could you see the inference of the same tree that results in less inference of hybridization?
• What do people assume about population size when people do gene tree/species tree inference?

Morning Chatter

“Extravaganza of optimism.”

“Despite it not being a good idea generally, I think it is a good idea here.”

“It’s an agreed upon simplicity.”

“Everything is idiosyncratic.”

Framework Paper Discussion

• Title: Macroecology and macroevolution needing to come together
• eco-evo is more micro/micro
• Both ecology and evolution have this micro/macro split
• 2000-2500 words in GEB, ecography, or oikos
• The difference between ecological time and evolutionary time is one of the reasons this ecology/evolution split has been going on for so long.
• Maybe include the spatial scale / temporal scale diagram (with community assembly, popgen, and phylogenetics occupying different spaces).
• Have some questions where it’s necessary to do both eco and evo, but then maybe also think about when you don’t have to do both.
  • “I want to know when I don’t need to care about macroevolution”

“Microecology could become macroecology if you just do more of it.”

Reporting back from the Morning working groups

Island Ontogeny

• What are the data types and what are we assuming in the model?
• We are assuming area but there could be other factors we’re not thinking about
  • Island area
  • Available habitat area
  • Anything that influences the extinction rate/cladogenesis rate.
  • A new island arises might increase the rates of cladogenesis
    • Do we have good enough data to tell exactly when islands arose
  • If not looking at the whole archipelago you might just look at the oldest island and the youngest island (especially if you’re looking at a progression).
  • Assuming the mainland is somewhat static (you can’t do this for the youngest islands because colonization is assumed to be coming from the older islands which are not static).

Alpha/Beta group

• Getting datasets and trying to prepare them
• plot level bundance data (standardized) is desired, but plot level richness is the barrier to entry (minimum possible dataset)
• Archieplagos where there’s variation in contribution of evolution
  • Some islands mostly assembled, some with in situ diversification
• Take a meta-analysis approach, look at a bunch of different systems and try to identify the effect sizes.
• Even if they are fully assembled systems they’re still interesting because they’ll contribute to the meta-analysis and identification of effect sizes

Abundance/Diversification group

• Split the idea into two papers: one more empirical and one more abundant
• Look at empirical datasets from islands: A couple clades from HI, galapagos, cichlids
• Perhaps use the MESS model or use a much reduced model inspired by MESS as the theoretical core.
• Abundance distribution, specify how migration damps speciation, waiting time depends on abundance and migration, perhaps we could build an analytical model?
• Ne instead of abundance. How would divergence w/in a species accumulate and build a (as divergence accumulates the probability of speciation increases).
• Adaptive dynamics could also come into play.