Using phylogenetic information and the comparative method to evaluate hypotheses in macroecology
Author
dc.contributor.author
Hernández, Cristián E.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Rodríguez-Serrano, Enrique
Author
dc.contributor.author
Avaria-Llautureo, Jorge
Author
dc.contributor.author
Inostroza-Michael, Oscar
Author
dc.contributor.author
Morales-Pallero, Bryan
Author
dc.contributor.author
Boric-Bargetto, Dusan
Author
dc.contributor.author
Canales-Aguirre, Cristian B.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Marquet, Pablo A.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Meade, Andrew
Admission date
dc.date.accessioned
2018-12-20T14:13:55Z
Available date
dc.date.available
2018-12-20T14:13:55Z
Publication date
dc.date.issued
2013
Cita de ítem
dc.identifier.citation
Methods in Ecology and Evolution, Volumen 4, Issue 5, 2018, Pages 401-415
Identifier
dc.identifier.issn
2041210X
Identifier
dc.identifier.other
10.1111/2041-210X.12033
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/155026
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
It is widely recognized that macroecological patterns are not independent of the evolution of the lineages involved in generating these patterns. While many researchers have begun to evaluate the effect of ancestor-descendant relationships on observed patterns using the phylogenetic comparative method, most macroecological studies only utilize the cross-sectional comparative method to 'remove the phylogenetic history', without considering the option of evaluating its effect without removing it. Currently, most researchers use this method without explicitly evaluating three fundamental evolutionary assumptions of the comparative method: (i) that the phylogeny is constructed without error (which implies evaluating phylogenetic uncertainty); (ii) that more closely related species tend to show more similar characters than expected by chance (which implies evaluating the phylogenetic signal) and; (iii) that the model of the characters' evolution effectively recapitulates their history (whic