In what can legitimately be called a taxonomic coup, an Anolis lizard has stolen the cover of Evolution for the third time in 8 months. That’s right folks – 3 out of the last 8 Evolution covers have been anoles (see our coverage of past covers here).
The latest, from the April 2011 issue of Evolution, highlights a new paper by Steve Poe and company about the relationship between deep evolutionary history and recent naturalization success in anoles. The punch line is that anole species endemic to single-species islands share a suite of traits with anoles that have become naturalized outside of their native ranges. Furthermore, the traits of such ‘solitary anoles’ may be used to predict naturalization more generally within Anolis. It’s an interesting paper and it demonstrates the utility of phylogenetic “tree-thinking” in matters relevant to conservation biology. Poe et al. go one step further though, provocatively suggesting that human-mediated anole invasions simply represent the acceleration of already-present ecological and evolutionary processes, and that humans have changed “the tempo, rather than the essence, of omnipresent natural processes” (p. 1200).
About a week ago, an esteemed foreign colleague asked if I had a PDF of Ernest Williams’ famous 1983 Lizard Ecology book chapter on the evolution of the anole ecomorphs. I didn’t, nor did anyone else to my knowledge, so I scanned it today. In doing so I was able to renew my appreciation for just how LONG this gem is – nearly FIFTY PAGES including refs. I hope that no one ever has to scan it again!
PS. As a teaser, here’s Figure 2 – the ubiquitous ecomorph figure that’s found its way into countless anole presentations over the past quarter century.
Julián Velasco and colleagues recently added a new species to the anoles: Anolis anoriensis from the central Andes of Colombia, described in The Herpetological Journal. This species is placed in the aequatorialis group, and appears to be very similar to Anolis eulaemus, another Dactyloa group anole from the central Andes. Anolis anoriensis joins a host of recently described Andean anoles from this clade (e.g., Ayala-Varela and Velasco 2010; Ayala-Varela and Torres-Carvahal 2010 – see New Anole Literature for full citations) and adds to the incredible diversity of anoles in Colombia, which already boasts more recognized species than any other country. Despite these recent descriptions, the relationships of Andean anoles remain extremely poorly known, as does our understanding of the factors responsible for the generation of such diversity.
Anolis anoriensis (top panels) versus Anolis eulaemus (bottom panels), from Velasco et al. 2010
The list sets out to honor naturalists who have lost their lives in the field or during other natural history pursuits. A lot of sad stories behind the names here, but a lot of epic ones too. I would bet that a great many of these fallen naturalists died doing what they loved best.
One of the names on the list is Ken Miyata, a young anole biologist who passed away in 1983. Ken was a student of Ernest Williams at Harvard’s Museum of Comparative Zoology in the late 70s (Ph.D. 1980), and he conducted fantastic work on anoles and other reptiles and amphibians, primarily in Ecuador. Although many of us probably know him for the mark he made on tropical herpetology during his brief career, Ken was much better known as a world-class fly fisherman, and it was that passion that ultimately killed him (see a brief retrospective here; see also these recent mentions of Ken by his old friends Jerry Coyne and Greg Mayer on the blog Why Evolution is True).
A name that’s missing from this wall is Preston Webster, another seminal anole biologist who died too young in a 1975 car crash. You can suggest additions to Conniff’s list in the comments of that blog, and he’ll add them. Does anyone who knew Webster want to put a few words on this site? I know very little about the man, but if there aren’t any takers, I’ll try to add him in a couple of days. I believe Webster was in the Dakotas when he died, and I don’t know if he was engaged in any ‘naturalist’s pursuits’ at the time (certainly not on anoles!). But this probably doesn’t matter – there are other great biologists on the list who died early in unrelated accidents.
There are several other herpetologists mentioned. Are there any other anole biologists missing from the list?
With several colleagues, Cuba’s foremost authority on Anolis lizards – Lourdes Rodríguez Schettino – has recently published a paper on the anoles of Soroa that’s well worth checking out.
Soroa, in Pinar del Río, Cuba
Soroa is an unbelievable place. Although you wouldn’t guess it to be special for any particular reason – it’s a lower mid-elevation inland site in Cuba’s Pinar del Rio province – the place is lousy with anoles. There are a whopping 11 species there – on a visit you can see representatives of all six Greater Antillean ecomorphs in action, as well as several ‘boutique anoles’ – weirdos like the aquatic Anolis vermiculatus, or the ‘chipojo bobo’ Anolis (Chamaeleolis) barbatus that have no counterparts on other islands.
Soroa is a legendary site among anolefolk, and has been host to seemingly countless studies of anole ecology, doubtless due to the presence of a moderately comfortable resort on the premises. Lourdes Rodríguez Schettino and her students and colleagues regularly studied the natural history of Soroa’s anoles in the 80s and 90s (much of this work is summarized in an excellent 1999 book), and in the mid-90s, she hosted two joint Cuba-United States research expeditions to study anole community ecology there (Losos et al. 2003).
The famous Soroa waterfall (pretty tame in the middle of a 2008 drought)
If you spend much time at all in the collections of a natural history museum, you’re guaranteed to come across some weird and hilarious stuff (e.g., see this book). Here’s a gem of a specimen label – this is a green anole skeleton from the Smithsonian (photo and “discovery” by Thom Sanger).
The collecting remarks seem odd enough that I figured it might be an inside joke. But Thom found the following question posted on the Circus History Message Board, which probably explains everything.…
“I have a somewhat of a bizarre question. My aunt, who is in her late 70’s, told my husband and I a story about when she went to the circus a child. My Aunt told us that when she was little girl her mother would buy her a little lizard that was attached a chain that was then attached to a pin. The pin would be worn and the lizard would walk around you until it died.”
The message board has replies from many old-time circus-goers confirming that Anolis carolinensis were indeed tied to strings and peddled to kids at the circus. According to one poster, the lizards were called “bugs” and the peddlers “bug men.” (!?!?)
“Jennifer, the lizards (which have been called chameleons) were known as “bugs” and the sellers on the midway were known as “bug men”. The pitchman would pin a “bug” on his lapel to be viewed as harmless and he carried the “bugs” for sale mounted on a board. Unfortunately the “bugs” didn’t last too long after leaving the circus grounds but kids loved them. John Goodall”
The distichus group on Hispaniola, including forms suggested for full species status by Glor and Laport. Image from their Figure 1.
In a recently accepted paper in Molecular Phylogenetic and Evolution, Rich Glor and Robert Laport suggest that the stalwart Hispaniolan anoles, A. distichus and A. brevirostris, actually represent complexes of species under the general lineage species concept. This idea is not new, but it’s surprising how long it’s been since it’s gotten serious attention. Before his tragic death in a car accident, Preston Webster made substantial progress working on the brevirostris-group species problem, using allozyme data to study the genetics of Haitian populations in the 1960s and 70s. Webster found evidence for genetic isolation among several brevirostris populations differing in dewlap color (Webster and Burns 1973), but never erected any species. He advocated the idea though, and under the guidance of legendary Caribbean systematist Albert Schwartz, Douglas Arnold erected three additional species from within Anolis brevirostris, naming one after the late Preston Webster (A caudalis, A. marron, and A. websteri; Arnold 1980). He also named erected two additional A. brevirostris subspecies.
In several later papers, Susan Case also used allozymes to study distichus and brevirostris subspecies, but she stopped short of naming any as species. She did, however, note evidence of stable genetic breaks among some distichus subspecies (e.g., Case and Williams 1984).
In the paper at hand, Glor and Laport turned their attentions mainly to the widespread Hispaniolan Anolis distichus, which has 16 subspecies (including some not on the main island of Hispaniola) that often differ remarkably in dewlap coloration. Focusing on the Dominican Republic side of Hispaniola, they found evidence for deep divergence in mtDNA among these subspecies, and argue that they represent distinct evolutionary lineages. The picture isn’t completely clean of course – one of the forms (favillarum) renders another (dominicensis) paraphyletic for this particular marker – but the authors still make a case that these groups represent true evolutionarily distinct units. Certainly some will disagree with Glor and Laport’s decision to elevate these subspecies using the general lineage concept. But species concepts aside, it’s hard to argue with their conclusion that “studies that continue to treat A. distichus (sensu lato) as a single reproductively continuous unit will be problematic.”
Check out the paper! I think this is the tip of the iceberg for distichoid anole systematics. Glor and Laport refrained from tackling the Haitian distichus subspecies and also remained agnostic on the formal status of the three subspecies of A. brevirostris. Rest assured this is just the beginning though…
The latest, from the April 2011 issue of Evolution, highlights a new paper by Steve Poe and company about the relationship between deep evolutionary history and recent naturalization success in anoles. The punch line is that anole species endemic to single-species islands share a suite of traits with anoles that have become naturalized outside of their native ranges. Furthermore, the traits of such ‘solitary anoles’ may be used to predict naturalization more generally within Anolis. It’s an interesting paper and it demonstrates the utility of phylogenetic “tree-thinking” in matters relevant to conservation biology. Poe et al. go one step further though, provocatively suggesting that human-mediated anole invasions simply represent the acceleration of already-present ecological and evolutionary processes, and that humans have changed “the tempo, rather than the essence, of omnipresent natural processes” (p. 1200).
