Submit a preprint

650

Color polymorphism and conspicuousness do not increase speciation rates in Lacertidsuse asterix (*) to get italics
Thomas de Solan, Barry Sinervo, Philippe Geniez, Patrice David, Pierre-André CrochetPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2023
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conspicuous body colors and color polymorphism have been hypothesized to increase rates of speciation. Conspicuous colors are evolutionary labile, and often involved in intraspecific sexual signaling and thus may provide a raw material from which reproductive isolation can easily evolve, while polymorphism could favor rapid evolution of new lineages through morphic speciation. Here, we investigated the influence of the presence/absence of conspicuous colorations, and of color polymorphism on the speciation of Lacertids. We used several state-dependent diversification models, and showed that, regardless of the methods, conspicuous colorations and color polymorphism were not related to species speciation. While the lack of correlation between conspicuous colorations and speciation rates is in line with most of the literature testing this hypothesis, the results for color polymorphism contradict previous studies, and question the generality of the morphic speciation hypothesis.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7619485You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7619485You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
coloration, sexual selection, polymorphism, speciation, reptiles
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Evolutionary Ecology, Macroevolution, Speciation
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEvolBiol. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2023-02-22 10:05:03
Alejandro Gonzalez-Voyer