↓ Skip to main content

Profuse evolutionary diversification and speciation on volcanic islands: transposon instability and amplification bursts explain the genetic paradox

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Profuse evolutionary diversification and speciation on volcanic islands: transposon instability and amplification bursts explain the genetic paradox
Published in
Biology Direct, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13062-016-0146-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elysse M. Craddock

Abstract

Species-rich adaptive radiations arising from rare plant and animal colonizers are common on remote volcanic archipelagoes. However, they present a paradox. The severe genetic bottleneck of founder events and effects of inbreeding depression, coupled with the inherently stressful volcanic environment, would seem to predict reduced evolutionary potential and increased risk of extinction, rather than rapid adaptive divergence and speciation. Significantly, eukaryotic genomes harbor many families of transposable elements (TEs) that are mobilized by genome shock; these elements may be the primary drivers of genetic reorganization and speciation on volcanic islands. Here I propose that a central factor in the spectacular radiation and diversification of the endemic Hawaiian Drosophila and other terrestrial lineages on the Hawaiian and other oceanic islands has been repeated bursts of transposition of multiple TEs induced by the unique ecological features of volcanic habitats. Founder individuals and populations on remote volcanic islands experience significant levels of physiological and genomic stress as a consequence of both biotic and abiotic factors. This results in disruption of the usual epigenetic suppression of TEs, unleashing them to proliferate and spread, which in turn gives rise to novel genetic variation and remodels genomic regulatory circuits, facilitating rapid morphological, ecological and behavioral change, and adaptive radiation. To obtain empirical support for the hypothesis, test organisms should be exposed to prolonged heat stress, high levels of carbon dioxide and other volcanic gases, along with inbreeding. Data from subsequent whole genome sequencing and bioinformatics screening for TE numbers and locations would then be compared with initial pre-exposure TE information for the test strains, a labor-intensive project. Several predicted outcomes arising from the hypothesis are discussed. Currently available data are consistent with the proposed concept of stress-induced TE mobilization as a trigger of evolutionary diversification and speciation on volcanic islands. The main implication is that both TEs and species should proliferate at a much higher rate on volcanic islands than elsewhere. Second, the evolvability of a lineage may correlate with the abundance and distribution of TEs in the genome. Successful colonizers of volcanic habitats with high genomic proportions of TEs may be best poised to found a speciose lineage that gives rise to a dramatic adaptive radiation. Colonizers that are depauperate in TEs are likely to be evolutionarily constrained and diversify little, if at all. This article was reviewed by Dr. James Shapiro and Dr. Wolfgang Miller (nominated by Editorial Board member Dr. I. King Jordan).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 27 27%
Student > Bachelor 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 15%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Master 8 8%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 34%
Environmental Science 6 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 18 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 December 2022.
All research outputs
#6,409,463
of 24,330,936 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#219
of 517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,187
of 340,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#11
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,330,936 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.