Anolis Comparative Genomics Underway!

There was a lot of discussion last month about the fabulous anole goings-on at the SICB meetings. However, there were other conferences sporting important anole work over the holidays. One of them was International Plant and Animal Genome XXII, described as “the largest AG-genomics meeting in the world” and held in San Diego in early January. Perhaps not a venue at which you’d expect anole work to be discussed, but there was Poster #720:

Mining the Most Species-Rich Amniote Genus: de novo Sequencing of Three Anole Lizards for Comparative Genomic Analysis #P720

Date: Monday, January 13
10:00 am – 11:30 am

Description:

Presenters: Marc Tollis Arizona State UniversityElizabeth D. Hutchins Arizona State UniversityWalter L. Eckalbar Arizona State UniversityMichael R. Crusoe Arizona State UniversityCatherine M. May Arizona State UniversityJessica Stapley Smithsonian Tropical Research InstituteElise Kulik Arizona State UniversityMatt J. Huentelman Translational Genomics Research InstituteRebecca E. Fisher University of ArizonaKenro Kusumi Arizona State University

P720 – Mining the Most Species-Rich Amniote Genus: de novo Sequencing of Three Anole Lizards for Comparative Genomic Analysis

The repeated evolution of morphological adaptations to specific ecological niches makes Anolis lizards a spectacular example of adaptive radiation in vertebrates, and an ideal model for comparative genomics. The complete genome of the green anole (A. carolinensis) has already provided insights to the evolution of genomic and phenotypic variation in vertebrates. A multi-species comparison within the Anolis genus would increase the power of studies seeking to understand the genomic bases of species diversification. We carried out de novo whole genome sequencing and draft assembly of three species, the grass anole (A. auratus), the bridled anole (A. frenatus), and the slender anole (A. apletophallus). Here we report some of our preliminary comparative genomic findings. Analysis of the abundance and diversity of transposable elements within these genomes has revealed repetitive landscapes typical of non-mammalian vertebrates, yet variation between Anolis species is greater than what is observed across most mammals. This may have provided a genomic environment amenable to key adaptations during the Anolis radiation. Using well-defined models such as mouse and chicken, we identified orthologous genes integral to myogenesis and limb development, and are beginning to catalogue interspecific variation in protein-coding genes and cis-regulatory motifs. Functional anatomical and histological studies are being performed to quantify the tail and hindlimb muscle groups of these species compared to A. carolinensis. Our ultimate goal is to identify the divergent alleles associated with ecological speciation, thus bridging the genotype-phenotype gap.

Brown Anoles in Tree Islands

A recent trip to the Everglades with Palm botanist Sara Edelman was meant to provide a welcome break from studying for qualifying exams, and give her the opportunity to further educate me on all things palm (which was previously limited to determining which lizards in Miami appear to live on them).

After spending the morning locating individuals of her study species, the native and state-threatened Paurotis palm (Acoelorrhaphe wrightii), we had received very little wildlife luck (which was the true reason for me volunteering to ‘help’). From past visits, I had found brown anoles (Anolis sagrei) at every car park along the Everglades National Park road down to Flamingo, likely hitch-hiking unwittingly on visitors cars, but to my knowledge they had yet to disperse convincingly out from these. On our second to last survey of the day, to this tree island off the main road just south of Mahogany Hammock, while searching for native green anoles (Anolis carolinensis) which I had yet to see, I heard some rustling in the bushes – lo and behold, sitting there as bold as day signalling straight at me was a male brown anole!

Everglades tree island characterised by Paurotis palm (Acoelorrhaphe wrightii), Saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), Buttonwood (Conocarpus sp.) and Pine (Pinus sp.), and inset brown anole (Anolis sagrei) observed inside

Everglades tree island characterised by Paurotis palm (Acoelorrhaphe wrightii), Saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), Buttonwood (Conocarpus sp.) and Pine (Pinus sp.), with [inset] brown anole (Anolis sagrei) observed inside

Now, observing brown anoles here shouldn’t be a surprise, should it? After all they are already in many surrounding places accessible by car, therefore it was only a matter of time before they spread further afield. However, areas like these in the Everglades may represent one of the last refuges of green anoles from introduced non-native species found everywhere else in south Florida (an idea I mentioned here a few months ago). Tree islands are masses of larger vegetation (unsurprisingly characterised by trees) formed gradually as vegetation clumps in the slow moving Everglades flow. Over time, debris from colonising plants raises the ground level just above surrounding water level, meaning they provide important havens for many wildlife species. During the wet season the dispersal potential for brown anoles would be limited. All of the areas surrounding tree islands are generally inundated, meaning landscape movement through the thin-stemmed sawgrass plains may be easier for more nimble footed green anoles, however somewhat less graceful for browns. This, however, is all hypothetical.

So ruling out human-mediated release or dropping by a clumsy predator, we could assume that this chap arrived there all by himself. This would suggest that brown anoles have no problems in traversing through sawgrass, although temporal factors may be important (i.e. dispersing during the dry season when water levels are low or absent).

The implications for the expansion of this species through the Everglades remain unclear, although their relationship with green anoles leads to a predictable outcome (discussed extensively on AA [1, 2, 3). Just how much effect is a highly fecund, hyper-dense, extremely competitive and resilient insectivore going to have on these small ‘island’ ecosystems?

Organic Lettuce Farmers Use Anoles for Pest Control

Read all about it in this post on Deadspin.

Update March 13, 2014: Here’s a less happy story on the same theme.

Anoles and the Polar Vortex: A Happy Ending

All’s well that ends well

A couple of days ago, we had a post about a poor anole frozen to death in wintry Texas. Today comes a report on Dust Tracks on the Web of another green anole incapacitated by unseasonable chill, but with a happier ending.

Display Behaviour in Anolis sagrei: Deterring Predators, Daunting Opponents or Drawing Partners?

A.sagrei_M&F_Sorao

Male and female A. sagrei at the famous Soroa, Cuba locality.

Anole displays consist of conspicuous behaviors that are known to be used in multiple contexts, such as exhibiting territory ownership and territory defense, mate attraction and female receptivity, species recognition, and even predator deterrence. As most of you know, the display repertoire typically involves three major signal types: “dewlap extensions” (DE, pulsing of the throat fan or dewlap), “push-ups” (PU, up and down movement of the body and tail), and “head-nods” (HN, up and down movement of the head only). Although the visual display behavior in anoles has been extensively studied, the function of these three major signal types (DE, PU and HN) remains highly equivocal, and especially in the brown anole. Therefore, we decided to set up a behavioral experiment addressing DE, PU and HN signaling rates across diverse contexts, using the brown anole as study species.

Our study differed from previous ones in two main aspects. Whereas most other studies have focused on male signaling only, we looked to the three separate signal types in both male and female lizards. Secondly, our study is the first one to compare display rates across a wide range of contexts using the same individuals over again (repeated-measures design). This design could, however, only work under fully-controlled laboratory testing conditions. The diverse contexts we tested included predator, non-predator and several social interactions (i.e., mirror, male-male, male-female and female-male). For the predator and non-predator interactions, we used a living curly-tailed and equally-sized ocellated spiny-tailed lizard, respectively; the social context involved only conspecific interactions. Rather than examining display structure, we focused on the frequency with which each individual signal type was performed.

What did our results show? We found that brown anoles of both sexes exhibited higher display rates in the presence of conspecifics than when confronted with a predator or non-predator. DE, PU, and HN seem to be of main importance during brown anole social interactions, and thus not in predator deterrence. Whereas the females did not significantly raise display rates in response to a mirror or during intersexual interactions compared to a control situation, males did. The PU signal type only appears to play a major role for brown anole males during aggressive encounters. On the other hand, increased frequencies of all signal types during male-female interactions suggest that DE, PU, and HN are all essential for male courtship.

Staged intersexual interactions in the brown anole

Staged intersexual interactions in the brown anole

Finally, we suggest that intersexual selection is probably a driving force for frequency-related dewlap use in both sexes (we found a very strong, but not significant, trend that females increased their DE frequency only during female-male interactions). In contrast, pronounced intersexual differences were detected for PU and HN rates within a social context. I would like to mention once more that all our behavioral experiments were conducted under controlled laboratory conditions and that caution is needed on the general interpretation of our findings.

To end, I would like to say that we did experience some difficulties in comparing our PU and HN results with results from previous studies on brown anole display behavior, due to an inconsistent terminology found in the literature. Authors have variously used the terms “nod,” “headnod,” “bob,” “headbob” and “pushup” to refer to the stereotyped bobbing display and it is not always clear which movements correspond exactly to which terms (e.g., only head movement, only front legs, whole body movement including/excluding tail). Partan et al. (2011) did a very nice job by discussing several bobbing display terms in her paper, but still we think there is need for a more consistent and defined “bobbing” terminology. In this way, pooling display datasets and comparing display results will become more efficient and accurate, which in turn may lead to better “anole science”!

Driessens, T., Vanhooydonck, B., Van Damme, R. 2014. Deterring predators, daunting opponents or drawing partners? Signaling rates across diverse contexts in the lizard Anolis sagrei. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:173–184.

Trunk-ground Anoles Living in High Rises

This weekend I recently saw an adult male Cuban brown anole (Anolis sagrei) perching higher than I have ever observed – roughly 4m high!

Adult male Cuban brown anole (Anolis sagrei) perching uncharacteristically high

Adult male Cuban brown anole (Anolis sagrei) perching uncharacteristically high

So anole aficionados, what dizzying heights have you observed trunk-ground anoles up to?

*My apologies for the poor quality of the zoomed in sections.

Female Display in Anolis cristatellus, and a Call For Your Observations!

In species of Anolis where females have dewlaps, we know very little about exactly how females use their dewlaps. Losos (2009) describes this lamentable situation thus:

“Unfortunately, little is known about how females use their dewlaps, and the little information that is available from three species permits few generalities. Anolis carolinensis females only rarely use their dewlaps in intersexual displays (Jenssen et al., 2000), whereas female A. valencienni use their dewlaps primarily to discourage courting males, including those of other species (Hicks and Trivers, 1983). Both A. carolinensis and A. bahorucoensis females use their dewlaps in intrasexual displays (Orrell and Jenssen, 1998, 2003); in A carolinensis, females use the dewlap more at close range and less at long range in female-female interactions compared to dewlap use in male-male interactions (Jenssen et al., 2000; Orrell and Jenssen, 2003). Unfortunately, without more information on how females use their dewlaps, we will not be able to explain sexual dimorphism and dichromatism in anole dewlaps.”

Since then, Martha Muñoz has added an observation from A. armouribut the numbers are still small.

Attempted forced copulation in Anolis cristatellus

Attempted forced copulation in Anolis cristatellus

In July 2013, I spent ten days observing A. cristatellus in Mayagüez, Puerto Rico, and can add one more species to the list of female anoles that use their dewlaps to dissuade males from mating with them. I was mapping male territories and counting male-male interactions in a park in one of Mayagüez’s fancier neighbourhoods, and came across a male chasing after a female. I sat down to watch the interaction, and was struck by how determined the female seemed to avoid mating with this male. You’ll notice how the male is biting the female much lower down the body than is normal during mating, indicating how the female is trying to get away. Her dewlap is completely extended during this interaction.

The chase went on for several minutes before the female ran to the end of a thin branch and another male showed up to chase the first male away. I proceeded to catch and mark this second male, and later observations revealed him to be the resident territory holder of the tree.

A little later, we caught a male in the tree adjacent to one in which the showdown occurred. In a fantastic stroke of luck that anyone whose work depends on identifying individual animals in the field will appreciate, we were able to determine that this male from the adjacent tree was in fact the first of the two males observed earlier.

How, you ask, did we perform this forensic  wizardry? Observe the second tiny tail of the interloper attempting the forced copulation:IMG_3259

 

Caught red-handed!

I was showing these photos to Jonathan Losos the other day, and he immediately noted that the observation of a female using her dewlap was pretty rare. Of course, the obvious response was to write a blogpost about it, but then we realised that with Anole Annals‘ daily viewership of up to 1500, we could do more than just write a blogpost–we could do citizen science! So this, ladies and gentlemen, is an invitation to all of you to help build a  dataset. It’s more than the usual request for participation and comments that I end many posts with–it’s a challenge to all of us AA readers to keep an eye and camera out for examples of females using their dewlaps, so that we can together figure out a pretty basic piece of Anolis biology.

We’ve done this sort of citizen science before, quite successfully: here’s Kristin Winchell’s call for data on urban anoles, and here’s the resultant analysis.  And there’s all sorts of exciting natural history questions that would be impractical for individuals to tackle on their own, but that we can solve easily as a team. Let’s make this blog a citizen science hotspot!

 

Measuring Maximal Performance In Animals: The Cautionary Story From The Calaveras County Frog Jumping Contest

For more than three decades, since the seminal work of Ray Huey, Al Bennett, and Steve Arnold, biologists have measured whole animal performance–how fast they run, how far they jump, how well they can swim–to understand how species are adapted to their environment.  Work on anoles has been a prime example of how we can study differences among individuals and species to understand how natural selection works and why species living in different environments possess different morphologies (several AA posts have discussed this sort of work [e.g., 1, 2, 3]).

But a critical assumption of all of this research is that we can get animals to perform maximally. Otherwise, it’s tough to study what causes variation in maximal capabilities if animals aren’t performing maximally. The catch is: how do you tell if an animal is going all out? Sure, it’s easy to weed out the slackers, but distinguishing a lizard giving it his all from one going at, say, 90% of max…hard to tell.

In an important and entertaining paper, Henry Astley and colleagues provide some sobering information. The short story goes as follows, and you really should watch the video below for more details and some great images: biomechanicians have studied frog jumping for decades to understand how muscles work. Bullfrogs are known not to jump very well. The maximum jump ever recorded in the lab was only 1.3 m, whereas the much smaller Cuban treefrog can bound 1.7 m. The proffered explanation was that bullfrogs live on land and in the water, and so their morphology must be a compromise.

But…the Guinness Book of World Records claims that a bullfrog–Rosie the Ribeter, to be exact–once jumped 2.18 meters at the Calaveras County Fair. That’s  68% farther than any scientist had ever recorded in the lab. Sounds like a bunch of hooey, right? Well, just to debunk this nonsense, a bunch of Brown University biologists headed to sunny California to visit the County Fair, eat some cotton candy, and check out the frogs. And, lo and behold, it’s true–bullfrogs there regularly far exceed the lab record.

The story’s a lot more complicated–it turns out that there are “pro” frog jumpers–and I won’t go into the details; the paper is well worth a read, very entertaining and sobering for lab performance types (abstract here). But the short story is this: it seems that lab studies had massively underestimated how far bullfrogs can jump, calling into question many of the conclusions that had been reached about their physiology. Moreover, records for the maximum jump distance at the fair showed a steady increase for the first 50 years before levelling off for the last 30. This suggests that the people who jump the frogs (and some families have been doing this for generations) have only gradually learned exactly what conditions and behaviors maximally stimulate the frogs. And this suggests that lab scientists, who just guess at what may work best and tinker a little bit, may not have much of a chance of hitting on the right stimuli.

There’s been lots of great press coverage, too–just google “calaveras frog astley” or something like that. But, first, watch the video and go read the paper (I can email you a copy if you can’t access it online).

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKFpvoez7_M

Southern Cold Snap: Reptilian Toll

carolinensis frozen

Two days ago, the Boston Globe had an article online,

Winter storm causes havoc in US South

“A winter storm that hit the southern United States yesterday all but paralyzed the city of Atlanta, stranding people in cars at stores and children at their schools. The storm only brought a few inches across the region but with the ice caused major problems in America’s southern region.”
Accompanying the article were 28 photos. The one above was #22, with the following caption: “Snow covers a dead lizard in Springville, Ala., on Jan. 28. (Mark Almond/Associated Press)”

When the Going Gets Cold, Anoles Get Colder

CTmax, Tb, and CTmin of cybotoid anoles & env. temperature. Modified from Fig 2 in Muñoz et al.

CTmax, Tb, and CTmin of cybotoid anoles & env. temperature. Modified from Fig 2 in Muñoz et al.

AA contributor Martha Muñoz’s work on altitudinal variation in the cybotoid anoles has already netted her the Raymond B. Huey award and of course, been featured on AA. A big chunk of this work, co-first authored with Maureen Stimola, has just been published by the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. If you haven’t read it yet, check it out.

I love this paper. However, in the spirit of full disclosure, I’m completely biased as I happen of be one of the co-authors. But I’m sure I’d love it anyway. Why? In part because it tests a clear hypothesis using multiple lines of evidence and eliminates confounding explanations – characteristics every paper should have. It also has cool (or should I say hot?) results. However, more than this, I think this paper demonstrates the power of combining good ole’ fashioned (yet cutting edge) field work with macroecological and macroevolutionary models, demonstrating how these different approaches can really complement each other.

What did Muñoz and company find? Briefly, they looked at hot and cold tolerance (CTmax and CTmin) of six species of cybotoid anoles on Hispaniola, in relation to elevation. They found far more variation in CTmin than CTmax across species (and populations). By bringing in a little macroecology, they showed that CTmax isn’t correlated with environmental temperature, but CTmin is, i.e. when the going gets cold, the anoles get colder – sort of. The catch is that while CTmin strongly tracks temperature, daytime body temperature does not. This is a neat result in and of itself and fits well with a big, recent, data-mining paper showing similar trends across hundreds of both ecto- and endothermic species. But while it doesn’t have the breadth of that paper, Muñoz et al. were able to go further. Firstly, bringing in a little macroevolutionary analysis, they showed that yes, CTmin has actually evolved significantly faster than CTmax. Neat, but at this point you should be asking yourself, “What about acclimatization?” and “Is this just plasticity?” Muñoz et al. asked the same thing and headed back to the field. A lot of work later and the answer was no. An acclimation experiment rejected this possibility.

At this stage, most macroecological and macroevolutionary analyses would have to stop at the identification of a clear, and intriguing pattern of fast past evolution of cold tolerance along an elevation gradient, but little CTmax evolution. The Discussion of such a paper would suggest potential hypotheses to explain the pattern and that would be that. But Muñoz et al. again went further and, by working in the field to measure perch use and operative temperatures, worked out why . The key result showed that lizards can behaviourally thermoregulate to escape the heat, thus reducing selection on heat tolerance, i.e. the Bogert effect. However, the nighttime cold cannot be escaped (actually, it can, by moving to England where it hasn’t dipped below -2 deg C this winter. Enjoy that polar vortex America!), leading to selection on cold tolerance.

Like I said, very cool results and a real testament to the power of using field experiments and macroevolutionary models to inform each other and go beyond what each approach could do in isolation. So please read it, challenge it, and build on it.

Page 164 of 297

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén