Search

The tradition of classifying cases of speciation into discrete geographic categories (allopatric, parapatric and sympatric) fuelled decades of fruitful research and debate. Not surprisingly, as the science has become more sophisticated, this simplistic taxonomy has become increasingly obsolete. Geographic patterns are now reasonably well understood. Sister species are rarely sympatric, implying that sympatric speciation, it its most general sense, is rare. However, sympatric speciation, even in its most restricted population genetic sense, is possible. Several case studies have demonstrated that divergence has occurred in nature without geographic barriers to gene flow. Obviously, different sets of criteria for sympatric speciation will lead to different numbers of qualifying cases. But changing the rules of nomenclature to make ‘sympatric speciation’ more or less common does not constitute scientific progress. Advances in the study of speciation have come from studies of the processes that constrain or promote divergence, and how they are affected by geography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sympatric speciation has always fascinated evolutionary biologists, and for good reason; it pits diversifying selection directly against the tendency of sexual reproduction to homogenize populations. However, different investigators have used different definitions of sympatric speciation and different criteria for diagnosing cases of sympatric speciation. Here, we explore some of the definitions that have been used in empirical and theoretical studies. Definitions based on biogeography do not always produce the same conclusions as definitions based on population genetics. The most precise definitions make sympatric speciation an infinitesimal end point of a continuum. Because it is virtually impossible to demonstrate the occurrence of such a theoretical extreme, we argue that testing whether a case fits a particular definition is less informative than evaluating the biological processes affecting divergence. We do not deny the importance of geographical context for understanding divergence. Rather, we believe this context can be better understood by modelling and measuring quantities, such as gene flow and selection, rather than assigning cases to discrete categories like sympatric and allopatric speciation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on the issues of terminology, gradient dynamics and the ease of sympatric speciation in adaptive dynamics. Importance of terminology in adaptive dynamics; Justification of the claims often made within the Adaptive Dynamics; Criticism of the initial conditions used in the allele frequencies.

Testing whether some species traits have a significant effect on diversification rates is central in the assessment of macroevolutionary theories. However, we still lack a powerful method to tackle this objective. I present a new method for the statistical analysis of diversification with species traits. The required data are observations of the traits on recent species, the phylogenetic tree of these species, and reconstructions of ancestral values of the traits. Several traits, either continuous or discrete, and in some cases their interactions, can be analyzed simultaneously. The parameters are estimated by the method of maximum likelihood. The statistical significance of the effects in a model can be tested with likelihood ratio tests. A simulation study showed that past random extinction events do not affect the Type I error rate of the tests, whereas statistical power is decreased, though some power is still kept if the effect of the simulated trait on speciation is strong. The use of the method is illustrated by the analysis of published data on primates. The analysis of these data showed that the apparent overall positive relationship between body mass and species diversity is actually an artifact due to a clade-specific effect. Within each clade the effect of body mass on speciation rate was in fact negative. The present method allows to take both effects (clade and body mass) into account simultaneously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While it now appears likely that sympatric speciation is possible, its generality remains contentious. If it really is rare, then most natural populations must not fit the assumptions of sympatric speciation theory. A better understanding of these assumptions may help identify when sympatric speciation is or is not likely. This paper investigates two such assumptions: that genetic variation for stringent assortative mating is not limiting and that females are not penalized for mating assortatively. Simulations demonstrate that the speed of sympatric speciation is very sensitive to the population's capacity for stringent assortative mating and is potentially extremely slow. The rapid divergence often thought to be a hallmark of sympatric speciation may only occur in a restricted area of parameter space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning processes potentially play a role in speciation but are often ignored in speciation models. Learning may, for instance, play a role when a new niche is being colonized, because the learning of niche features may cause niche-specific assortative mating and a tendency to produce young in this niche. Several animal species learn about their environmental features that may be important in finding or attracting mates. We use a gene-culture coevolutionary model to look into the effect of such learning on the colonization of new niches and on the genetic divergence between groups using different niches, which are steps necessary in achieving speciation. We assume that density is regulated separately in each of the two niches and that the viability of an individual depends on its genotype as well as on which niche it exploits. Our results show that genetic adaptation to the new niche is enhanced by a high female fecundity and a low viability selection against heterozygotes. Furthermore, when initial colonization (without genetic adaptation) fails, genetic divergence is more difficult when the mating preference is stronger. In contrast, when colonization without genetic adaptation is successful, a stronger mating preference makes genetic divergence easier. An increase in the number of egg-laying mistakes by females can have a positive or negative effect on the success of genetic adaptation depending on other parameters. We show that genetic divergence can be prevented by a niche shift, which can occur only if viabilities in the two niches are asymmetrical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]