Abstract
Explaining why some lineages diversify while others do not and how are key objectives in evolutionary biology. Young radiations of closely related species derived from the same source population provide an excellent opportunity to disentangle the relative contributions of possible drivers of diversification. In these settings, lineage‐specific effects are shared and can be ruled out. Moreover, the relevant demographic and ecological parameters can be estimated accurately. Midas cichlid fish in Nicaragua have repeatedly colonized several crater lakes, diverged from the same source populations, and, interestingly, diversified in some of them but not others. Here, using the most comprehensive molecular and geometric morphometric data set on Midas cichlids to date (∼20,000 SNPs, 12 landmarks, ∼700 individuals), we aim to understand why and how crater lake populations diverge and why some of them are more prone to diversify in sympatry than others. Taking ancestor‐descendant relationships into account, we find that Midas cichlids diverged in parallel from their source population mostly—but not exclusively—by evolving more slender body shapes in all six investigated crater lakes. Admixture among crater lakes has possibly facilitated this process in one case, but overall, admixture and secondary waves of colonization cannot predict morphological divergence and intralacustrine diversification. Instead, morphological divergence is larger the more dissimilar a crater lake is compared to the source lake and happens rapidly after colonization followed by a slow‐down with time. Our data also provide some evidence that founder effects may positively contribute to divergence. The depth of a crater lake is positively associated with variation in body shapes (and number of species), presumably by providing more ecological opportunities. In conclusion, we find that parallel morphological divergence in allopatry and the propensity for diversification in sympatry across the entire Midas cichlid fish radiation is partly predictable and mostly driven by ecology.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Gonzalo Machado‐Schiaffino 2 ; Meyer, Axel 3 1 Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
2 Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany; Current Address: Genetics Area, Department of Functional Biology, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
3 Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany; Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts





