Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2018 Aug 22;285(1885):20181292. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2018.1292

Metabolic rates, climate and macroevolution: a case study using Neogene molluscs

Luke C Strotz 1,2,, Erin E Saupe 3, Julien Kimmig 2, Bruce S Lieberman 1,2
PMCID: PMC6125889  PMID: 30135165

Abstract

Basal metabolic rate (BMR) is posited to be a fundamental control on the structure and dynamics of ecological networks, influencing organism resource use and rates of senescence. Differences in the maintenance energy requirements of individual species therefore potentially predict extinction likelihood. If validated, this would comprise an important link between organismic ecology and macroevolutionary dynamics. To test this hypothesis, the BMRs of organisms within fossil species were determined using body size and temperature data, and considered in the light of species' survival and extinction through time. Our analysis focused on the high-resolution record of Pliocene to recent molluscs (bivalves and gastropods) from the Western Atlantic. Species-specific BMRs were calculated by measuring the size range of specimens from museum collections, determining ocean temperature using the HadCM3 global climate model, and deriving values based on relevant equations. Intriguingly, a statistically significant difference in metabolic rate exists between those bivalve and gastropod taxa that went extinct and those that survived throughout the course of the Neogene. This indicates that there is a scaling up from organismic properties to species survival for these communities. Metabolic rate could therefore represent an important metric for predicting future extinction patterns, with changes in global climate potentially affecting the lifespan of individuals, ultimately leading to the extinction of the species they are contained within. We also find that, at the assemblage level, there are no significant differences in metabolic rates for different time intervals throughout the entire study period. This may suggest that Neogene mollusc communities have remained energetically stable, despite many extinctions.

Keywords: extinction, body size, temperature, bivalve, gastropod, hierarchy

1. Introduction

Metabolic rate is defined as the rate of energy uptake, transformation and allocation for an individual organism [1], and plays a fundamental role in resource use and rates of senescence [15]. Notably, population dynamics [6], geographical patterns in species richness [7] and community dynamics [8] are all related to body size and temperature, the primary determinants of metabolic rate for poikilotherms. There is also an association between metabolic rate and latitudinal diversity gradients, and perhaps between metabolism and rates of speciation [1,7,9]. These examples provide a clear connection as to how ecological processes operating at the organismic level scale up to higher level patterns, a hypothesis previously investigated in a variety of modern [1,7,10,11] and fossil ecosystems [1214].

Here, we explore the relationship between metabolic rate and extinction to try to further consider the connection between organismic ecology and macroevolutionary dynamics [1518]. As metabolic rate is a primary control for traits important for identifying extinction likelihood [19] and with maximum lifespan shown to scale with body size and temperature [4,20,21], we propose metabolic rate itself as a potential proxy for identifying the extinction probability of a species. Specifically, we would expect that species with higher mean metabolic rates are more likely to go extinct than species from the same clade with lower mean metabolic rates.

The dataset we use to assess this possibility is the Pliocene (5.333 Ma) to recent molluscan fauna of the Western Atlantic, a region that has experienced significant fluctuations in climate and ambient temperatures [2226]; perturbations that have been previously linked to species turnover [27,28]. The diverse, well-preserved and abundant molluscan fauna of this region has been frequently used to study macroevolution in the fossil record [17,2731]. Using both extant and fossil species provides a pool of confirmed extinct species whose metabolic rates can be compared with those of coeval still extant species.

Our analysis focuses on basal metabolic rate (BMR), representative of the maintenance energy requirements of an individual organism. For modern taxa, the BMR of animals can be determined through direct measurement of resting respiration rate. This is not possible for fossil organisms, so instead we employ an energetic model based on the allometric scaling of energy requirements with body size to estimate BMR [32]. This method has been successfully applied in previous palaeontological studies (e.g. [1214]). In this model, BMR is related to body size, temperature and clade-specific characteristics, all parameters that can be readily determined for fossil (and extant) organisms.

For 299 species of North American bivalves and gastropods, we calculate BMR by combining measures of body size with detailed estimates of ocean temperature sourced from the HadCM3 global climate model [33,34]. One hundred and seventy-eight of these species became extinct during the study interval. Identifying if a difference in BMR exists between these two species pools offers a potential metric for predicting future extinction patterns as well as a means of considering other extinction intervals in the fossil record. Further, tabulating what changes occur in BMR at the assemblage level across the study time interval, when considered in the light of theoretical approaches to community ecology, may enhance our understanding of extinction as both an ecological and genealogical phenomenon [16,18,35].

2. Results

A full description of all methods used to generate the results below is provided in the electronic supplementary material.

(a). Basal metabolic rate as a predictor of extinction likelihood

Using the total dataset (electronic supplementary material, table S1), for both bivalves and gastropods, we find a significant difference in Bspecies between extinct and extant species (Mann–Whitney p < 0.0005 for both bivalves and gastropods) with medium effect sizes for both clades (electronic supplementary material, table S5). BMR values are higher for extinct species (figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Distribution of logeBMR (in watts) for extinct versus extant bivalves and gastropods based upon our total Neogene mollusc dataset, for only broadly distributed species and for only narrowly distributed species. Values for extant species in blue (left) and extinct species in orange (right). Horizontal bars represent median values, boxes enclose the 25th through 75th percentiles, and whiskers indicate 1.5× interquartile range. (Online version in colour.)

Varying the ambient palaeo-temperature, removing temperature entirely from the calculation, removing the scaling constants and removing outliers in the size distribution do not change either the direction nor significance of these results, although there is almost always a reduced effect size (electronic supplementary material, table S5). When we randomly designate species as either extinct or extant in equal proportions, we are only able to obtain a significant difference in BMR values between the extinct and extant categories (Mann–Whitney p < 0.05), 1.6% of the time with bivalve datasets and 1.45% of the time with gastropod datasets (out of 10 000 replicates total, 160 and 145 times for bivalves and gastropods, respectively). Potential differences in BMR between families do not seem to impinge upon our overall result. Neither extinct nor extant species are confined to a specific group of families, many families contain both extinct and extant species and our statistical tests for such a possibility do not support substantial variation in BMR among families. For bivalves, pairwise comparisons of families (using Bspecies and corrected for multiple comparisons) produce a significant difference in only 1 out of 171 comparisons; for gastropods, they produce a significant difference in only 8 out of 325 comparisons. Moreover, for both clades, the pairwise comparisons that yield significant results include both extinct and extant species. Finally, as there is a lack of correlation between Bspecies and latitude (electronic supplementary material, figure S1), our result does not seem to be primarily owing to differences in latitude between extinct and extant species.

With the results of sensitivity tests consistent with those obtained for the total dataset, the low percentage of significant results for datasets with random status assignment, negligible statistical difference in BMR among families and no apparent association between latitude and BMR, this suggests that the difference in BMR values between extinct and extant species is unlikely to be an artefact of our choice of input parameters, statistical power issues, taxonomy or the latitudinal temperature gradient. We therefore consider our original supposition, that the representative metabolic rate of a species is a predictor of extinction likelihood, to be upheld.

(b). Basal metabolic rate as a predictor of extinction likelihood, partitioned by broadly versus narrowly distributed species

Considering those species in our dataset identified as broadly distributed (our potential generalist species) versus the remainder of the fauna, we find that for the broadly distributed species, there is no significant difference in BMR between extinct and extant species for bivalves (Mann–Whitney p = 0.137) or gastropods (Mann–Whitney p = 0.085) (figure 1). By contrast, for the narrowly distributed species, the significant difference retrieved for all species is maintained (both clades Mann–Whitney p < 0.003; figure 1). Adjusting our input parameters as described above for our sensitivity analyses results in the same outcome for bivalves and in the majority of cases for gastropods (electronic supplementary material, table S5). Thus, the signal retrieved in the analysis of the entire dataset is primarily derived from patterns among the narrowly distributed species. While broadly distributed taxa come from only a small selection of taxonomic families (electronic supplementary material, table S1), the families that contain broadly distributed species also contain narrowly distributed species. When the clade-specific scaling constant is removed from our BMR calculation, the difference in the patterns identified for broadly versus narrowly distributed species remains unchanged for bivalves, but does change for broadly distributed gastropod species (electronic supplementary material, table S5). It may be the case that the difference in result for broadly versus narrowly distributed taxa reflects differences in metabolism among higher order clades, but further exploration of this result, probably best achieved using phylogenetic methods, is necessary to confirm this.

(c). Changes in basal metabolic rate at the assemblage level

For both bivalves and gastropods, we find no difference in the distribution of assemblage level metabolic rates for each of our Neogene time bins (Kruskal–Wallis p ≥ 0.4; figure 2). These results were resilient to the various sensitivity analyses (all p > 0.3) and are manifest in spite of significant changes in diversity across the study period (electronic supplementary material, figure S2 and table S7). This result indicates that Western Atlantic mollusc assemblages within formations have been energetically stable throughout the late Neogene, even in the face of numerous extinctions and climatic changes.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Mean per capita logeBMR (in watts) of Western Atlantic bivalves and gastropods for each of five separate time bins (early Pliocene, late Pliocene, early Pleistocene, middle Pleistocene, late Pleistocene). Error bars represent standard error.

3. Discussion

By assessing macroevolutionary patterns of Neogene molluscs from the Western Atlantic in the context of palaeoclimatic models, we identify metabolic rate as playing a significant role in mediating extinction and survival (figure 1). In particular, species with lower reconstructed BMR values are more likely to survive than their higher BMR molluscan kin. This result is resilient to a variety of sensitivity tests and thus cannot be attributed merely to uncertainties in key parameters used in our metabolic rate calculations or other possible sources of error. The results derived herein come from only a limited taxonomic sampling and restricted time period. However, if they are more broadly generalizable then this would suggest a possible connection between metabolism and the death of both individuals and species (see also [4,21]), as previous studies have demonstrated that, for individual organisms, higher metabolic rates correlate with both higher mortality rates and higher rates of cell decay (e.g. [4,3639]). Metabolism may therefore represent an important control on mortality at multiple hierarchical levels sensu Vrba & Eldredge [40], Eldredge [16,41], Lieberman et al. [18], Jablonski [17], Eldredge et al. [42], Tëmkin & Serrelli [43] and Fábregas-Tejeda & Vergara-Silva [35]. Moreover, it suggests that a direct continuum exists between an organism-level phenomenon (metabolic rate) and a species-level response (extinction), such that processes operating at a lower hierarchical level can be extrapolated to explain patterns produced at a higher hierarchical level.

Differences in metabolic rate between extinct and extant species reinforce established predictions of the metabolic theory of ecology (or MTE [1]), which champions metabolic rate as the fundamental control on macroecological processes and most observed patterns in ecology. Connecting metabolic rate to global biodiversity patterns via MTE has primarily focused on establishing that generation times of individuals and mutation rates (and ultimately speciation) have a Boltzmann relation to temperature (represented by ‘k’ in our BMR equation [7,11]). A metabolic explanation for extinction would place extinction at an equivalent level to speciation in an MTE framework, rather than being either a stochastic process [44] or only a function of speciation rate and population abundance [11].

However, our result does not imply that metabolic rate is the sole driver of extinction. For instance, the difference we observe between BMR of extinct and extant species may reflect variation in a constellation of organismic traits such as developmental rate, time to maturity, lifespan and population size, with a primary causal factor driving these differences being variation in the rate of energy uptake [1,19,45]. Further, there are other cases where population or species-level factors, or even shear chance, may be influencing patterns of extinction (see extensive discussions in [1517,19,40,41,4648] and references therein). The difference in result identified for broadly distributed versus narrowly distributed species also certainly advocates for a level of complexity in explaining extinction that extends beyond simple BMR values. Nevertheless, that a difference exists in BMR between extinct and extant species does demonstrate a metabolic component to extinction that was previously putative [4,21].

At the macroscale, the BMR for the Western Atlantic mollusc assemblage within any given time interval seems to show dramatic stasis over a substantial period of time and in the face of numerous extinctions (178 species), significant changes in diversity (electronic supplementary material, figure S2 and table S7) and major climate change [2226]. The small number of time bins limits the broader significance of these results, but the lack of variability across the study period does intimate that Neogene mollusc assemblages have remained energetically stable (figure 2). Previous work over a much longer time period identified stasis in per capita metabolic rate for Cenozoic gastropods [13], congruent with our result. An important caveat, however, is that the assemblages we have constructed do not strictly represent biological communities, given the resolution of the fossil record, but, in general, this result seems to support the notion that ecosystems can at times best be defined as functional groups rather than being viewed in the context of the composition of particular taxa [49,50].

Presuming that the maintenance of mean metabolic rate for Neogene mollusc communities is a genuine phenomenon, this is consistent with a qualified form of ecological stasis [51], where the energy budgets of populations remain unchanged over long periods of time despite changes in taxonomic membership, environmental change, extinction and species invasions. The mean per capita metabolic activity at the macroscale can remain stable if any potential decrease in metabolic activity, such as extinction of a species, is mitigated by an increase in diversity (with new species subject to energetic equivalence), increased abundance of one or more existing species (with a subsequent reduction in mean size), or through invasion by immigrant species. These three mechanisms are not mutually exclusive and any or all of them could explain the pattern we observe. This scenario parallels Eldredge's [52] ‘sloshing bucket’ theory, with the turnover in Neogene mollusc communities seemingly not enough to lead to extreme ecological disruption.

4. Conclusion

When it comes to species, we do find a significant difference between the BMRs of extinct and extant taxa. When we extend our analysis to an assessment of mean BMR at the assemblage level over time, even in the face of significant climate change, there are no significant differences among the macro-level assemblages from different time periods. Together, these findings suggest that under certain circumstances when it comes to extinction, a continuum exists between phenomena at the level of the individual through to the level of a species, but that communities may be better defined as functional groups rather than by their species composition. Thus, understanding metabolic rate for fossil communities can provide crucial insight into extinction as an ecological and genealogical phenomenon (sensu [16,42]).

This manuscript has not been published in whole or in part elsewhere and is not currently being considered for publication in another journal.

Supplementary Material

Data and Methods
rspb20181292supp1.docx (38KB, docx)

Supplementary Material

Figure S1
rspb20181292supp2.pdf (341.4KB, pdf)

Supplementary Material

Figure S2
rspb20181292supp3.pdf (400.5KB, pdf)

Supplementary Material

Table S1
rspb20181292supp4.xlsx (47.9KB, xlsx)

Supplementary Material

Table S2
rspb20181292supp5.xlsx (8.6KB, xlsx)

Supplementary Material

Table S3
rspb20181292supp6.xlsx (126.9KB, xlsx)

Supplementary Material

Table S4
rspb20181292supp7.xlsx (1.7MB, xlsx)

Supplementary Material

Table S5
rspb20181292supp8.xlsx (11.7KB, xlsx)

Supplementary Material

Table S6
rspb20181292supp9.xlsx (43.8KB, xlsx)

Supplementary Material

Table S7
rspb20181292supp10.xlsx (16.9KB, xlsx)

Acknowledgements

We thank Roger Portell (FLMNH) for both providing images of specimens and for offering information on the geological context of the molluscan assemblages used in this study. We thank Stephen Hunter (University of Leeds) for providing palaeoclimatic data. PaleoGIS and PaleoWeb are plate tectonics reconstruction and basin modelling software developed by The Rothwell Group, LP and we thank them for providing this software for palaeo-coordinate reconstructions. We would also like to acknowledge all contributors to the Digital Atlas of Ancient Life and iDigBio (both those individuals responsible for set-up, maintenance and administration and those who have contributed content) as both of the data repositories made this study possible. Two anonymous reviewers provided important feedback that improved the overall quality of our paper.

Data accessibility

All additional data for this article are provided in the electronic supplementary material, tables S1–S7.

Authors' contributions

L.C.S. and B.S.L. conceived the study. L.C.S. and J.K. compiled mollusc data. E.E.S. provided palaeoclimate data and reconstructed palaeo-coordinates for Pliocene occurrences. L.C.S. performed all analyses and drafted all figures. L.C.S. and B.S.L. wrote the manuscript with input from all co-authors. All authors gave final approval for publication.

Competing interests

We declare we have no competing interests.

Funding

L.C.S. and B.S.L. were supported by NSF grant nos. EF-1206757 and DBI-1602067.

References

  • 1.Brown JH, Gillooly JF, Allen AP, Savage VM, West GB. 2004. Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85, 1771–1789. ( 10.1890/03-9000) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Van Voorhies WA, Ward S. 1999. Genetic and environmental conditions that increase longevity in Caenorhabditis elegans decrease metabolic rate. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 11 399–11 403. ( 10.1073/pnas.96.20.11399) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Trotta V, Calboli FC, Ziosi M, Guerra D, Pezzoli MC, David JR, Cavicchi S. 2006. Thermal plasticity in Drosophila melanogaster: a comparison of geographic populations. BMC Evol. Biol. 6, 67 ( 10.1186/1471-2148-6-67) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Munch SB, Salinas S. 2009. Latitudinal variation in lifespan within species is explained by the metabolic theory of ecology. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 13 860–13 864. ( 10.1073/pnas.0900300106) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.DeLong JP, Okie JG, Moses ME, Sibly RM, Brown JH. 2010. Shifts in metabolic scaling, production, and efficiency across major evolutionary transitions of life. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 12 941–12 945. ( 10.1073/pnas.1007783107) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Savage VM, Gillooly JF, Woodruff WH, West GB, Allen AP, Enquist BJ, Brown JH. 2004. The predominance of quarter-power scaling in biology. Funct. Ecol. 18, 257–282. ( 10.1111/j.0269-8463.2004.00856.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Allen AP, Brown JH, Gillooly JF. 2002. Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. Science 297, 1545–1548. ( 10.1126/science.1072380) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ. 2001. Invariant scaling relations across tree-dominated communities. Nature 410, 655–660. ( 10.1038/35070500) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Tilman D, HilleRisLambers J, Harpole S, Dybzinski R, Fargione J, Clark C, Lehman C. 2004. Does metabolic theory apply to community ecology? It's a matter of scale. Ecology 85, 1797–1799. ( 10.1890/03-0725) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ernest SKM, et al. 2003. Thermodynamic and metabolic effects on the scaling of production and population energy use. Ecol. Lett. 6, 990–995. ( 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00526.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Gillooly JF, Allen AP. 2007. Linking global patterns in biodiversity to evolutionary dynamics using metabolic theory. Ecology 88, 1890–1894. ( 10.1890/06-1935.1) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Finnegan S, Droser ML. 2008. Body size, energetics, and the Ordovician restructuring of marine ecosystems. Paleobiology 34, 342–359. ( 10.1666/07074.1) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Finnegan S, McClain CM, Kosnik MA, Payne JL. 2011. Escargots through time: an energetic comparison of marine gastropod assemblages before and after the Mesozoic Marine Revolution. Paleobiology 37, 252–269. ( 10.1666/09066.1) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Payne JL, Heim NA, Knope ML, McClain CR. 2014. Metabolic dominance of bivalves predates brachiopod diversity decline by more than 150 million years. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20133122 ( 10.1098/rspb.2013.3122) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Myers CE, Saupe EE. 2013. A macroevolutionary expansion of the modern synthesis and the importance of extrinsic abiotic factors. Palaeontology 56, 1179–1198. ( 10.1111/pala.12053) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Eldredge N. 1985. Unfinished synthesis: biological hierarchies and modern evolutionary thought. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Jablonski D. 2008. Species selection: theory and data. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 39, 501–524. ( 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173510) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Lieberman BS, Miller W, Eldredge N. 2007. Paleontological patterns, macroecological dynamics and the evolutionary process. Evol. Biol. 34, 28–48. ( 10.1007/s11692-007-9005-4) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pearson RG, et al. 2014. Life history and spatial traits predict extinction risk due to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 217–221. ( 10.1038/nclimate2113) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Van Voorhies WA. 2001. Metabolism and lifespan. Exp. Gerontol. 36, 55–64. ( 10.1016/S0531-5565(00)00208-4) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.McCoy MW, Gillooly JF. 2008. Predicting natural mortality rates of plants and animals. Ecol. Lett 11, 710–716. ( 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01190.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Cronin TM. 1988. Evolution of marine climates of the US Atlantic coast during the past four million years. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 318, 661–678. ( 10.1098/rstb.1988.0029) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Robinson MM, Dowsett HJ, Chandler MA. 2008. Pliocene role in assessing future climate impacts. Eos. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 89, 501–502. ( 10.1029/2008EO490001) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Dowsett HJ, Robinson MM. 2009. Mid-Pliocene equatorial Pacific sea surface temperature reconstruction: a multi-proxy perspective. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 367, 109–125. ( 10.1098/rsta.2008.0206) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Haywood AM. et al. 2011. Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP): experimental design and boundary conditions (experiment 1). Geosci. Model Dev. 3, 227–242. ( 10.5194/gmd-3-227-2010) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Montes C, et al. 2015. Middle Miocene closure of the Central American seaway. Science 348, 226–229. ( 10.1126/science.aaa2815) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Vermeij GJ, Petuch EJ. 1986. Differential extinction in tropical American molluscs: endemism, architecture, and the Panama land bridge. Malacologia 27, 29–41. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Jackson JB, Jung P, Coates AG, Collins LS. 1993. Diversity and extinction of tropical American mollusks and emergence of the Isthmus of Panama. Science 260, 1624–1624 ( 10.1126/science.260.5114.1624) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Nürnberg S, Aberhan M. 2013. Habitat breadth and geographic range predict diversity dynamics in marine Mesozoic bivalves. Paleobiology 39, 360–372. ( 10.1666/12047) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Saupe EE, Hendricks JR, Portell RW, Dowsett HJ, Haywood A, Hunter SJ, Lieberman BS. 2014. Macroevolutionary consequences of profound climate change on niche evolution in marine molluscs over the past three million years. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20141995 ( 10.1098/rspb.2014.1995) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Saupe EE, Qiao H, Hendricks JR, Portell RW, Hunter SJ, Soberón J, Lieberman BS. 2015. Niche breadth and geographic range size as determinants of species survival on geological time scales. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 24, 1159–1169. ( 10.1111/geb.12333) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Gillooly JF, Brown JH, West GB, Savage VM, Charnov EL. 2001. Effects of size and temperature on metabolic rate. Science 293, 2248–2251. ( 10.1126/science.1061967) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gordon C, Cooper C, Senior CA, Banks H, Gregory JM, Johns TC, Mitchell JF, Wood RA. 2000. The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Clim. Dyn. 16, 147–168. ( 10.1007/s003820050010) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Pope V, Gallani M, Rowntree P, Stratton R. 2000. The impact of new physical parameterizations in the Hadley Center coupled model without flux adjustments. Clim. Dyn. 17, 61–81. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Fábregas-Tejeda A, Vergara-Silva F. 2017. Hierarchy theory of evolution and the extended evolutionary synthesis: some epistemic bridges, some conceptual rifts. Evol. Biol. 45, 1–13. ( 10.1007/s11692-017-9438-3)29497217 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Kapahi P, Boulton ME, Kirkwood TB. 1999. Positive correlation between mammalian life span and cellular resistance to stress. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 26, 495–500. ( 10.1016/S0891-5849(98)00323-2) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Wright AF, Jacobson SG, Cideciyan AV, Roman AJ, Shu X, Vlachantoni D, McInnes RR, Riemersma RA. 2004. Lifespan and mitochondrial control of neurodegeneration. Nat. Genet. 36, 1153–1158. ( 10.1038/ng1448) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Atanasov AT. 2007. The linear allometric relationship between total metabolic energy per life span and body mass of mammals. Biosystems 90, 224–233. ( 10.1016/j.biosystems.2006.08.006) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hulbert A, Pamplona R, Buffenstein R, Buttemer W. 2007. Life and death: metabolic rate, membrane composition, and life span of animals. Physiol. Rev. 87, 1175–1213. ( 10.1152/physrev.00047.2006) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Vrba ES, Eldredge N. 1984. Individuals, hierarchies and processes: towards a more complete evolutionary theory. Paleobiology 10, 146–171. ( 10.1017/S0094837300008149) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Eldredge N. 1989. Macroevolutionary dynamics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Eldredge N, Pievani T, Serrelli E, Tëmkin I. 2016. Evolutionary theory: a hierarchical perspective. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Tëmkin I, Serrelli E. 2016. General principles of biological hierarchical systems. In Evolutionary theory: a hierarchical perspective (eds Eldredge N, Pievani T, Serrelli EM, Tëmkin I), pp. 19–25. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Hubbell SP. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Webb CO, Ackerly DD, McPeek MA, Donoghue MJ. 2002. Phylogenies and community ecology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 475–505. ( 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150448) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Jablonski D. 1986. Background and mass extinctions: the alternation of macroevolutionary regimes. Science 231, 129–134. ( 10.1126/science.231.4734.129) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Gould SJ. 2002. The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Lieberman BS, Vrba ES. 2005. Stephen Jay Gould on species selection: 30 years of insight. Paleobiology 31, 113–121. ( 10.1666/0094-8373(2005)031%5B0113:SJGOSS%5D2.0.CO;2) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Steneck RS, Dethier MN. 1994. A functional group approach to the structure of algal-dominated communities. Oikos 69, 476–498. ( 10.2307/3545860) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Tilman D, Knops J, Wedin D, Reich P, Ritchie M, Siemann E. 1997. The influence of functional diversity and composition on ecosystem processes. Science 277, 1300–1302. ( 10.1126/science.277.5330.1300) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Morris PJ, Ivany LC, Schopf KM, Brett CE. 1995. The challenge of paleoecological stasis: reassessing sources of evolutionary stability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 92, 11 269–11 273. ( 10.1073/pnas.92.24.11269) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Eldredge N. 2003. The sloshing bucket: how the physical realm controls evolution. In Evolutionary dynamics. Exploring the interplay of selection, accident, neutrality, and function (eds Crutchfield J, Schuster P), pp. 3–30. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Data and Methods
rspb20181292supp1.docx (38KB, docx)
Figure S1
rspb20181292supp2.pdf (341.4KB, pdf)
Figure S2
rspb20181292supp3.pdf (400.5KB, pdf)
Table S1
rspb20181292supp4.xlsx (47.9KB, xlsx)
Table S2
rspb20181292supp5.xlsx (8.6KB, xlsx)
Table S3
rspb20181292supp6.xlsx (126.9KB, xlsx)
Table S4
rspb20181292supp7.xlsx (1.7MB, xlsx)
Table S5
rspb20181292supp8.xlsx (11.7KB, xlsx)
Table S6
rspb20181292supp9.xlsx (43.8KB, xlsx)
Table S7
rspb20181292supp10.xlsx (16.9KB, xlsx)

Data Availability Statement

All additional data for this article are provided in the electronic supplementary material, tables S1–S7.


Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES