The shared functions of the skull are thought to result in common evolutionary patterns in mammalian cranial shape. Craniofacial evolutionary allometry (CREA) is a particularly prominent pattern where larger species display proportionally elongate facial skeletons and smaller braincases. It was recently proposed that CREA arises from biomechanical effects of cranial scaling when diets are similar. Thus, deviations from CREA should occur with changes in cranial biomechanics, for example due to dietary change. Here, we test this using 3D geometric morphometric analysis in a dataset of Australian murine crania, which are highly allometric. We contrast allometric and non-allometric variation in the cranium by comparing evolutionary mode, allometry, ordinations, as well as allometry, integration, and modularity in functional modules. We found evidence of stabilising selection in allometry-containing and size-free shape, and substantial non-allometric variation aligned with dietary specialisation in parallel with CREA. Integration among cranial modules was higher, and modularity lower, with size included, but integration between rostrum and cranial vault, which are involved in the CREA pattern, dropped dramatically after size removal. Our results thus support the hypothesis that CREA is a composite arising from selection on cranial function, with substantial non-allometric shape variation occurring alongside CREA where dietary specialisation impacts selection on gnawing function. This emphasises the need to research mammalian cranial evolution in the context of allometric and non-allometric selection on biomechanical function.

Among vertebrates, placental mammals are particularly variable in the covariance between cranial shape and body size (allometry), with rodents being a major exception. Australian murid rodents allow an assessment of the cause of this anomaly because they radiated on an ecologically diverse continent notably lacking other terrestrial placentals. Here, we use 3D geometric morphometrics to quantify species-level and evolutionary allometries in 38 species (317 crania) from all Australian murid genera. We ask whether ecological opportunity resulted in greater allometric diversity compared with other rodents or whether conserved allometry suggests intrinsic constraints and/or stabilizing selection. We also assess whether cranial shape variation follows the proposed rule of craniofacial evolutionary allometry (CREA), whereby larger species have relatively longer snouts and smaller braincases. To ensure we could differentiate parallel versus nonparallel species-level allometric slopes, we compared the slopes of rarefied samples across all clades. We found exceedingly conserved allometry and CREA-like patterns across the 10-million-year split betweenMusand Australian murids. This could support both intrinsic-constraint and stabilizing-selection hypotheses for conserved allometry. Large-bodied frugivores evolved faster than other species along the allometric trajectory, which could suggest stabilizing selection on the shape of the masticatory apparatus as body size changes.

Abstract Multidimensional analysis of traits are now common in ecology and evolution and are based on trait spaces in which each dimension summarizes the observed trait combination (a morphospace or an ecospace). Observations of interest will typically occupy a subset of this space, and researchers will calculate one or more measures to quantify how organisms inhabit that space. In macroevolution and ecology, these measures called disparity or dissimilarity metrics are generalized as space occupancy measures. Researchers use these measures to investigate how space occupancy changes through time, in relation to other groups of organisms, or in response to global environmental changes. However, the mathematical and biological meaning of most space occupancy measures is vague with the majority of widely used measures lacking formal description. Here, we propose a broad classification of space occupancy measures into three categories that capture changes in size, density, or position. We study the behavior of 25 measures to changes in trait space size, density, and position on simulated and empirical datasets. We find that no measure describes all of trait space aspects but that some are better at capturing certain aspects. Our results confirm the three broad categories (size, density, and position) and allow us to relate changes in any of these categories to biological phenomena. Because the choice of space occupancy measures is specific to the data and question, we introduced https://tguillerme.shinyapps.io/moms/moms, a tool to both visualize and capture changes in space occupancy for any measurement. https://tguillerme.shinyapps.io/moms/moms is designed to help workers choose the right space occupancy measures, given the properties of their trait space and their biological question. By providing guidelines and common vocabulary for space occupancy analysis, we hope to help bridging the gap in multidimensional research between ecology and evolution.

BACKGROUND:Advances in 3D shape capture technology have made powerful shape analyses, such as geometric morphometrics, more feasible. While the highly accurate micro-computed tomography (µCT) scanners have been the "gold standard," recent improvements in 3D surface scanners may make this technology a faster, portable, and cost-effective alternative. Several studies have already compared the two devices but all use relatively large specimens such as human crania. Here we perform shape analyses on Australia's smallest rodent to test whether a 3D scanner produces similar results to a µCT scanner.METHODS:We captured 19 delicate mouse (Pseudomys delicatulus) crania with a µCT scanner and a 3D scanner for geometric morphometrics. We ran multiple Procrustes ANOVAs to test how variation due to scan device compared to other sources such as biologically relevant variation and operator error. We quantified operator error as levels of variation and repeatability. Further, we tested if the two devices performed differently at classifying individuals based on sexual dimorphism. Finally, we inspected scatterplots of principal component analysis (PCA) scores for non-random patterns.RESULTS:In all Procrustes ANOVAs, regardless of factors included, differences between individuals contributed the most to total variation. The PCA plots reflect this in how the individuals are dispersed. Including only the symmetric component of shape increased the biological signal relative to variation due to device and due to error. 3D scans showed a higher level of operator error as evidenced by a greater spread of their replicates on the PCA, a higher level of multivariate variation, and a lower repeatability score. However, the 3D scan and µCT scan datasets performed identically in classifying individuals based on intra-specific patterns of sexual dimorphism.DISCUSSION:Compared to µCT scans, we find that even low resolution 3D scans of very small specimens are sufficiently accurate to classify intra-specific differences. We also make three recommendations for best use of low resolution data. First, we recommend that extreme caution should be taken when analyzing the asymmetric component of shape variation. Second, using 3D scans generates more random error due to increased landmarking difficulty, therefore users should be conservative in landmark choice and avoid multiple operators. Third, using 3D scans introduces a source of systematic error relative to µCT scans, therefore we recommend not combining them when possible, especially in studies expecting little biological variation. Our findings support increased use of low resolution 3D scans for most morphological studies; they are likely also applicable to low resolution scans of large specimens made in a medical CT scanner. As most vertebrates are relatively small, we anticipate our results will bolster more researchers in designing affordable large scale studies on small specimens with 3D surface scanners.

Marsupials display far less forelimb diversity than placentals, possibly because of the laborious forelimb-powered climb to the pouch performed by most marsupial neonates. This is thought to result in stronger morphological integration (i.e., higher co-variance) within the marsupial forelimb skeleton, and lower integration between marsupial fore-and hind limbs, compared to other mammals. Possible mechanisms for this constraint are a fundamental developmental change in marsupial limb patterning, or alternatively more immediate perinatal biomechanical and metabolic requirements. In the latter case, peramelid marsupials (bandicoots), which have neonates that climb very little, should show lower within-limb and higher between-limb integration, compared to other marsupials. We tested this in four peramelid species and the related bilby, using partial correlation analyses of between-landmark linear measurements of limb bones, and Procrustes-based two-block partial least-squares analysis (2B-PLS) of limb bone shapes using the same landmarks. We find extensive between-limb integration in partial correlation analyses of only bone lengths, consistent with a reduction of a short-term biomechanical/ allocation constraint in peramelid forelimbs. However, partial correlations of bone proportions and 2B-PLS reveal extensive shape divergence between correlated bone pairs. This result contradicts expectations of developmental constraints or serial homology, instead suggesting a function-driven integration pattern. Comparing visualizations from cross-species principal components analysis and 2B-PLS, we tentatively identify selection for digging and half-bounding as the main driver of bandicoot limb integration patterning. This calls for further assessments of functional versus developmental limb integration in marsupials with a more strenuous neonatal climb to the pouch.

Background: High morphological diversity can occur in closely related animals when selection favors morphologies that are subject to intrinsic biological constraints. A good example is subterranean rodents of the genus Thomomys, one of the most taxonomically and morphologically diverse mammalian genera. Highly procumbent, tooth-digging rodent skull shapes are often geometric consequences of increased body size. Indeed, larger-bodied Thomomys species tend to inhabit harder soils. We used geometric morphometric analyses to investigate the interplay between soil hardness (the main extrinsic selection pressure on fossorial mammals) and allometry (i.e. shape change due to size change; generally considered the main intrinsic factor) on crania and humeri in this fast-evolving mammalian clade.Results: Larger Thomomys species/subspecies tend to have more procumbent cranial shapes with some exceptions, including a small-bodied species inhabiting hard soils. Counter to earlier suggestions, cranial shape within Thomomys does not follow a genus-wide allometric pattern as even regional subpopulations differ in allometric slopes. In contrast, humeral shape varies less with body size and with soil hardness. Soft-soil taxa have larger humeral muscle attachment sites but retain an orthodont (non-procumbent) cranial morphology. In intermediate soils, two pairs of sister taxa diverge through differential modifications on either the humerus or the cranium. In the hardest soils, both humeral and cranial morphology are derived through large muscle attachment sites and a high degree of procumbency.Conclusions: Our results show that conflict between morphological function and intrinsic allometric patterning can quickly and differentially alter the rodent skeleton, especially the skull. In addition, we found a new case of convergent evolution of incisor procumbency among large-,medium-, and small-sized species inhabiting hard soils. This occurs through different combinations of allometric and non-allometric changes, contributing to shape diversity within the genus. The strong influence of allometry on cranial shape appears to confirm suggestions that developmental change underlies mammalian cranial shape divergences, but this requires confirmation from ontogenetic studies. Our findings illustrate how a variety of intrinsic processes, resulting in species-level convergence, could sustain a genus-level range across a variety of extrinsic environments. This might represent a mechanism for observations of genus-level niche conservation despite species extinctions in mammals.

Species ranges are mediated by physiology, environmental factors, and competition with other organisms. The allopatric distribution of five species of northern Californian pocket gophers (Thomomys spp.) is hypothesized to result from competitive exclusion. The five species in this environmentally heterogeneous region separate into two subgenera, Thomomys or Megascapheus, which have divergent digging styles. While all pocket gophers dig with their claws, the tooth-digging adaptations of subgenus Megascapheus allow access to harder soils and climate-protected depths. In a Northern Californian locality, replacement of subgenus Thomomys with subgenus Megascapheus occurred gradually during the Pleistocene-Holocene transition. Concurrent climate change over this transition suggests that environmental factors--in addition to soil--define pocket gopher distributional limits. Here we show 1) that all pocket gophers occupy the subset of less energetically costly soils and 2) that subgenera sort by percent soil clay, bulk density, and shrink-swell capacity (a mineralogical attribute). While clay and bulk density (without major perturbations) stay constant over decades to millennia, low precipitation and high temperatures can cause shrink-swell clays to crack and harden within days. The strong yet underappreciated interaction between soil and moisture on the distribution of vertebrates is rarely considered when projecting species responses to climatic change. Furthermore, increased precipitation alters the weathering processes that create shrink-swell minerals. Two projected outcomes of ongoing climate change--higher temperatures and precipitation--will dramatically impact hardness of soil with shrink-swell minerals. Current climate models do not include factors controlling soil hardness, despite its impact on all organisms that depend on a stable soil structure.