Body size evolution in insular vertebrates: generality of the island rule

Aim My goals here are to (1) assess the generality of the island rule – the graded trend from gigantism in small species to dwarfism in larger species – for mammals and other terrestrial vertebrates on islands and island‐like ecosystems; (2) explore some related patterns of body size variation in insular vertebrates, in particular variation in body size as a function of island area and isolation; (3) offer causal explanations for these patterns; and (4) identify promising areas for future studies on body size evolution in insular vertebrates. Location Oceanic and near‐shore archipelagos, and island‐like ecosystems world‐wide. Methods Body size measurements of insular vertebrates (non‐volant mammals, bats, birds, snakes and turtles) were obtained from the literature, and then regression analyses were conducted to test whether body size of insular populations varies as a function of body size of the species on the mainland (the island rule) and with characteristics of the islands (i.e. island isolation and area). Results The island rule appears to be a general phenomenon both with mammalian orders (and to some degree within families and particular subfamilies) as well as across the species groups studied, including non‐volant mammals, bats, passerine birds, snakes and turtles. In addition, body size of numerous species in these classes of vertebrates varies significantly with island isolation and island area. Main conclusions The patterns observed here – the island rule and the tendency for body size among populations of particular species to vary with characteristics of the islands – are actually distinct and scale‐dependent phenomena. Patterns within archipelagos reflect the influence of island isolation and area on selective pressures (immigration filters, resource limitation, and intra‐ and interspecific interactions) within particular species. These patterns contribute to variation about the general trend referred to as the island rule, not the signal for that more general, large‐scale pattern. The island rule itself is an emergent pattern resulting from a combination of selective forces whose importance and influence on insular populations vary in a predictable manner along a gradient from relatively small to large species. As a result, body size of insular species tends to converge on a size that is optimal, or fundamental, for a particular bau plan and ecological strategy.     

‘On being the right size’ – Do aliens follow the rules?

Aim

To assess whether mammalian species introduced onto islands across the globe have evolved to exhibit body size patterns consistent with the ‘island rule,’, and to test an ecological explanation for body size evolution of insular mammals.

Location

Islands worldwide.

Methods

We assembled data on body mass, geographical characteristics (latitude, maximum elevation) and ecological communities (number of mammalian competitors, predators and prey) for 385 introduced populations across 285 islands, comprising 56 species of extant, non‐volant mammals. We used linear regression, ANCOVA and regression tree analyses to test whether introduced populations of mammals exhibit the island rule pattern, whether the degree of body size change increased with time in isolation and whether residual variation about the general trend can be attributed to the geographical and ecological characteristics of the islands.

Results

Introduced populations follow the predicted island rule trend, with body size shifts more pronounced for populations with greater residence times on the islands. Small mammals evolved to larger body sizes in lower latitudes and on islands with limited topographic relief. Consistent with our hypothesis on the ecology of evolution, body size of insular introduced populations was influenced by co‐occurring species of mammalian competitors, predators and prey.

Conclusion

The island rule is a pervasive pattern, exhibited across a broad span of geographical regions, taxa, time periods and, as evidenced here, for introduced as well as native mammals. Time in isolation impacts body size evolution profoundly. Body size shift of introduced mammals was much more pronounced with increasing residence times, yet far less than that exhibited by native, palaeo‐insular mammals (residence times > 10,000 years). Given the antiquity of many species introductions, it appears that much of what we view as the natural character and ecological dynamics of recent insular communities may have been rendered artefacts of ancient colonizations by humans and commensals.     

The effect of island area on body size in a primate species from the Sunda Shelf Islands

Aim  We examine the effect of island area on body dimensions in a single species of primate endemic to Southeast Asia, the long-tailed macaque ( Macaca fascicularis ). In addition, we test Allen's rule and a within-species or intraspecific equivalent of Bergmann's rule (i.e. Rensch's rule) to evaluate body size and shape evolution in this sample of insular macaques.
Location  The Sunda Shelf islands of Southeast Asia.
Methods  Body size measurements of insular macaques gathered from the literature were analysed relative to island area, latitude, maximum altitude, isolation from the mainland and other islands, and various climatic variables using linear regression.
Results  We found no statistically significant relationship between island area and body length or head length in our sample of insular long-tailed macaques. Tail length correlated negatively with island area. Head length and body length exhibited increases corresponding to increasing latitude, a finding seemingly consistent with the expression of Bergmann's rule within a single species. These variables, however, were not correlated with temperature, indicating that Bergmann's rule is not in effect. Tail length was not correlated with either temperature or increasing latitude, contrary to that predicted by Allen's rule.
Main conclusions  The island rule dictating that body size will covary with island area does not apply to this particular species of primate. Our study is consistent with results presented in the literature by demonstrating that skull and body length in insular long-tailed macaques do not, strictly speaking, conform to Rensch's rule. Unlike previous studies, however, our findings suggest that tail-length variation in insular macaques does not support Allen's rule.     

Size evolution in island lizards

Aim  The island rule, small animal gigantism and large animal dwarfism on islands, is a topic of much recent debate. While size evolution of insular lizards has been widely studied, whether or not they follow the island rule has never been investigated. I examined whether lizards show patterns consistent with the island rule.
Location  Islands worldwide.
Methods  I used literature data on the sizes of island–mainland population pairs in 59 species of lizards, spanning the entire size range of the group, and tested whether small insular lizards are larger than their mainland conspecifics and large insular lizards are smaller. I examined the influence of island area, island isolation, and dietary preferences on lizard size evolution.
Results  Using mean snout–vent length as an index of body size, I found that small lizards on islands become smaller than their mainland conspecifics, while large ones become larger still, opposite to predictions of the island rule. This was especially strong in carnivorous lizards; omnivorous and herbivorous species showed a pattern consistent with the island rule but this result was not statistically significant. No trends consistent with the island rule were found when maximum snout–vent length was used. Island area had, at best, a weak effect on body size. Using maximum snout–vent length as an index of body size resulted in most lizard populations appearing to be dwarfed on islands, but no such pattern was revealed when mean snout–vent length was used as a size index.
Main conclusions  I suggest that lizard body size is mostly influenced by resource availability, with large size allowing some lizard populations to exploit resources that are unavailable on the mainland. Lizards do not follow the island rule. Maximum snout–vent length may be biased by sampling effort, which should be taken into account when one uses this size index.     

Of mice and mammoths: evaluations of causal explanations for body size evolution in insular mammals

Aim We investigated the hypothesis that the insular body size of mammals results from selective forces whose influence varies with characteristics of the focal islands and the focal species, and with interactions among species (ecological displacement and release). Location Islands world‐wide. Methods We assembled data on the geographic characteristics (area, isolation, maximum elevation, latitude) and climate (annual averages and seasonality of temperature and precipitation) of islands, and on the ecological and morphological characteristics of focal species (number of mammalian competitors and predators, diet, body size of mainland reference populations) that were most relevant to our hypothesis (385 insular populations from 98 species of extant, non‐volant mammals across 248 islands). We used regression tree analyses to examine the hypothesized contextual importance of these factors in explaining variation in the insular body size of mammals. Results The results of regression tree analyses were consistent with predictions based on hypotheses of ecological release (more pronounced changes in body size on islands lacking mammalian competitors or predators), immigrant selection (more pronounced gigantism in small species inhabiting more isolated islands), thermoregulation and endurance during periods of climatic or environmental stress (more pronounced gigantism of small mammals on islands of higher latitudes or on those with colder and more seasonal climates), and resource subsidies (larger body size for mammals that utilize aquatic prey). The results, however, were not consistent with a prediction based on resource limitation and island area; that is, the insular body size of large mammals was not positively correlated with island area. Main conclusions These results support the hypothesis that the body size evolution of insular mammals is influenced by a combination of selective forces whose relative importance and nature of influence are contextual. While there may exist a theoretical optimal body size for mammals in general, the optimum for a particular insular population varies in a predictable manner with characteristics of the islands and the species, and with interactions among species. This study did, however, produce some unanticipated results that merit further study – patterns associated with Bergmann’s rule are amplified on islands, and the body size of small mammals appears to peak at intermediate and not maximum values of latitude and island isolation.     

The island rule: made to be broken?

The island rule is a hypothesis whereby small mammals evolve larger size on islands while large insular mammals dwarf. The rule is believed to emanate from small mammals growing larger to control more resources and enhance metabolic efficiency, while large mammals evolve smaller size to reduce resource requirements and increase reproductive output. We show that there is no evidence for the existence of the island rule when phylogenetic comparative methods are applied to a large, high-quality dataset. Rather, there are just a few clade-specific patterns: carnivores; heteromyid rodents; and artiodactyls typically evolve smaller size on islands whereas murid rodents usually grow larger. The island rule is probably an artefact of comparing distantly related groups showing clade-specific responses to insularity. Instead of a rule, size evolution on islands is likely to be governed by the biotic and abiotic characteristics of different islands, the biology of the species in question and contingency.     

Factors explaining increased body size in common shrews (Sorex araneus) on Scottish islands

Aim  Island populations of small mammals are often characterized by a larger body size compared with neighbouring mainland or continental populations of the same species. A number of reasons have been put forward to explain this phenomenon. The aim of this study was to test which of these hypotheses can best explain the increase of body size in common shrews ( Sorex araneus ) on islands.
Location  The fieldwork for this study was carried out on the islands of the Inner Hebrides, Clyde Islands and the west coast of Scotland.
Methods  This study compared body sizes of common shrews from mainland and island sites on the west coast of Scotland, based on measurements of hind foot lengths. On 10 of the 13 islands sampled, common shrews were significantly larger than on the mainland. Body size did not vary significantly among mainland populations. We used the directional contrasts method to test the relative contributions of possible factors explaining the large body size observed in the island populations.
Results  We found that body size of common shrews on islands was positively related to distance from mainland, negatively related to average annual temperature, negatively related to island size, and may also be influenced by the presence or absence of pygmy shrews ( Sorex minutus ) on the island.
Main conclusions  Our results suggest a role for founder events, Bergmann's rule and K -selection in determining body size of common shrews on islands.     

Climate change and size evolution in an island rodent species: new perspectives on the island rule

As stated by the island rule, small mammals evolve toward gigantism on islands. In addition they are known to evolve faster than their mainland counterparts. Body size in island mammals may also be influenced by geographical climatic gradients or climatic change through time. We tested the relative effects of climate change and isolation on the size of the Japanese rodent Apodemus speciosus and calculated evolutionary rates of body size change since the last glacial maximum (LGM). Currently A. speciosus populations conform both to Bergmann's rule, with an increase in body size with latitude, and to the island rule, with larger body sizes on small islands. We also found that fossil representatives of A. speciosus are larger than their extant relatives. Our estimated evolutionary rates since the LGM show that body size evolution on the smaller islands has been less than half as rapid as on Honshu, the mainland-type large island of Japan. We conclude that island populations exhibit larger body sizes today not because they have evolved toward gigantism, but because their evolution toward a smaller size, due to climate warming since the LGM, has been decelerated by the island effect. These combined results suggest that evolution in Quaternary island small mammals may not have been as fast as expected by the island effect because of the counteracting effect of climate change during this period.     

The island rule in large mammals: paleontology meets ecology

The island rule is the phenomenon of the miniaturization of large animals and the gigantism of small animals on islands, with mammals providing the classic case studies. Several explanations for this pattern have been suggested, and departures from the predictions of this rule are common among mammals of differing body size, trophic habits, and phylogenetic affinities. Here we offer a new explanation for the evolution of body size of large insular mammals, using evidence from both living and fossil island faunal assemblages. We demonstrate that the extent of dwarfism in ungulates depends on the existence of competitors and, to a lesser extent, on the presence of predators. In contrast, competition and predation have little or no effect on insular carnivore body size, which is influenced by the nature of the resource base. We suggest dwarfism in large herbivores is an outcome of the fitness increase resulting from the acceleration of reproduction in low-mortality environments. Carnivore size is dependent on the abundance and size of their prey. Size evolution of large mammals in different trophic levels has different underlying mechanisms, resulting in different patterns. Absolute body size may be only an indirect predictor of size evolution, with ecological interactions playing a major role.     

Empirical evidence for an optimal body size in snakes

Abstract The concept of optimal size has been invoked to explain patterns in body size of terrestrial mammals. However, the generality of this phenomenon has not been tested with similarly complete data from other taxonomic groups. In this study we describe three statistical patterns of body size in snakes, all of which indicate an optimal length of 1.0 m. First, a distribution of largest body lengths of 618 snake species had a single mode at 1.0 m. Second, we found a positive relationship between the size of the largest member of an island snake assemblage and island area and a negative relationship between the size of the smallest member of an island snake assemblage and island area. Best-fit lines through these data cross at a point corresponding to 1.0 m in body length, the presumed optimal size for a one-species island. Third, mainland snake species smaller than 1.0 m become larger on islands whereas those larger than 1.0 m become smaller on islands. The observation that all three analyses converge on a common body size is concordant with patterns observed in mammals and partial analyses of four other disparate animal clades. Because snakes differ so strikingly from mammals (ectotherms, gape-limited predators, elongate body shape) the concordant patterns of these two groups provide strong evidence for the evolution of an optimal body size within independent monophyletic groups. However, snakes differ from other taxonomic groups that have been studied in exhibiting a body size distribution that is not obviously skewed in either direction. We suggest that idiosyncratic features of the natural history of ectotherms allow relatively unconstrained distributions of body size whereas physiological limitations of endotherms constrain distributions of body size to a right skew.     

Body size of insular carnivores: little support for the island rule

Large mammals are thought to evolve to be smaller on islands, whereas small mammals grow larger. A negative correlation between relative size of island individuals and body mass is termed the "island rule." Several mechanisms--mainly competitive release, resource limitation, dispersal ability, and lighter predation pressure on islands, as well as a general physiological advantage of modal size--have been advanced to explain this pattern. We measured skulls and teeth of terrestrial members of the order Carnivora in order to analyze patterns of body size evolution between insular populations and their near mainland conspecifics. No correlations were found between the size ratios of insular/mainland carnivore species and body mass. Only little support for the island rule is found when individual populations rather than species are considered. Our data are at odds with those advanced in support of theories of optimal body size. Carnivore size is subjected to a host of selective pressures that do not vary uniformly from place to place. Mass alone cannot account for the patterns in body size of insular carnivores.     

Slaying dragons: limited evidence for unusual body size evolution on islands

Aim Island taxa often attain forms outside the range achieved by mainland relatives. Body size evolution of vertebrates on islands has therefore received much attention, with two seemingly conflicting patterns thought to prevail: (1) islands harbour animals of extreme size, and (2) islands promote evolution towards medium body size (‘the island rule’). We test both hypotheses using body size distributions of mammal, lizard and bird species. Location World‐wide. Methods We assembled body size and insularity datasets for the world’s lizards, birds and mammals. We compared the frequencies with which the largest or smallest member of a group is insular with the frequencies expected if insularity is randomly assigned within groups. We tested whether size extremes on islands considered across mammalian phylogeny depart from a null expectation under a Brownian motion model. We tested the island rule by comparing insular and mainland members of (1) a taxonomic level and (2) mammalian sister species, to determine if large insular animals tend to evolve smaller body sizes while small ones evolve larger sizes. Results The smallest species in a taxon (order, family or genus) are insular no more often than would be expected by chance in all groups. The largest species within lizard families and bird genera (but no other taxonomic levels) are insular more often than expected. The incidence of extreme sizes in insular mammals never departs from the null, except among extant genera, where gigantism is marginally less common than expected under a Brownian motion null. Mammals follow the island rule at the genus level and when comparing sister species and clades. This appears to be driven mainly by insular dwarfing in large‐bodied lineages. A similar pattern in birds is apparent for species within orders. However, lizards follow the converse pattern. Main conclusions The popular misconception that islands have more than their fair share of size extremes may stem from a greater tendency to notice gigantism and dwarfism when they occur on islands. There is compelling evidence for insular dwarfing in large mammals, but not in other taxa, and little evidence for the second component of the island rule – gigantism in small‐bodied taxa.     

Environmental correlates of body size distributions of European springtails (Hexapoda: Collembola)

Aim Species–body size distributions (SBDs) are plots of species richness across body size classes. They have been linked to energetic constraints, speciation–extinction dynamics and to evolutionary trends. However, little is known about the spatial variation of size distributions. Here we study SBDs of European springtails (Collembola) at a continental scale and test whether minimum, average and maximum body size and the shapes of size distributions change across latitudinal and longitudinal gradients and whether SBDs of islands and mainlands differ. We also test whether the island rule and the positive body size–range size relationship of vertebrates also holds for Collembola. Location Europe. Methods We use a unique data set on the spatial distributions of 2102 species of European springtails across 52 countries and larger islands together with associated data on body size, area, climate variables, longitude and latitude. Differences in the central moments of SBDs are inferred from simultaneous spatial autoregression models. Results The SBD of the European Collembola and its largest suborder Entomobryomorpha is unimodal and symmetrical. Average, minimum and maximum body weight and the skewness of the mainland/island SBDs peaked at intermediate latitudes. We could not find simple latitudinal gradients in minimum and maximum body weight. Average and maximum body size increased with country/island area in accordance with the island rule in vertebrates, while minimum body size did not significantly differ between islands and mainlands. Finally, we found a weak but statistically significant positive correlation of range size and body size. Main conclusions We provide evidence for differences in body size distributions between islands and mainlands that are in part in line with the island rule in invertebrates. We also find evidence for an interspecific body size–range size relationship similar to that of vertebrates although the vertebrate pattern is much stronger than the springtail pattern. Our results on latitudinal gradients of maximum and average body size imply the need to account for species richness and area effects in the study of latitudinal gradients in body size. We recommend implementing sample size and area effects in the study of body size distributions on islands and mainlands.     

Rule reversal: Ecogeographical patterns of body size variation in the common treeshrew (Mammalia,Scandentia)

There are a number of ecogeographical “rules” that describe patterns of geographical variation among organisms. The island rule predicts that populations of larger mammals on islands evolve smaller mean body size than their mainland counterparts, whereas smaller‐bodied mammals evolve larger size. Bergmann's rule predicts that populations of a species in colder climates (generally at higher latitudes) have larger mean body sizes than conspecifics in warmer climates (at lower latitudes). These two rules are rarely tested together and neither has been rigorously tested in treeshrews, a clade of small‐bodied mammals in their own order (Scandentia) broadly distributed in mainland Southeast Asia and on islands throughout much of the Sunda Shelf. The common treeshrew, Tupaia glis, is an excellent candidate for study and was used to test these two rules simultaneously for the first time in treeshrews. This species is distributed on the Malay Peninsula and several offshore islands east, west, and south of the mainland. Using craniodental dimensions as a proxy for body size, we investigated how island size, distance from the mainland, and maximum sea depth between the mainland and the islands relate to body size of 13 insular T. glis populations while also controlling for latitude and correlation among variables. We found a strong negative effect of latitude on body size in the common treeshrew, indicating the inverse of Bergmann's rule. We did not detect any overall difference in body size between the island and mainland populations. However, there was an effect of island area and maximum sea depth on body size among island populations. Although there is a strong latitudinal effect on body size, neither Bergmann's rule nor the island rule applies to the common treeshrew. The results of our analyses demonstrate the necessity of assessing multiple variables simultaneously in studies of ecogeographical rules.     

Community-wide character displacement in New Zealand skinks

Aim  To test for community-wide character displacement in New Zealand skinks.
Location  Four small islands in the New Zealand archipelago.
Methods  (1) We conducted a field experiment on a single island to evaluate whether prey size selection is correlated with lizard body size. We pitfall trapped 69 skinks from three species, measured several aspects of their morphology and presented each animal with a variety of different-sized prey in a food choice experiment. (2) We tested whether the morphological characteristics associated with prey size selection were evenly partitioned in four island skink communities using null models.
Results  Prey size selection was associated with skink morphology; larger skinks consumed larger prey. Null model analyses showed support for evenly displaced body sizes on one island, weak support on one island and no support on two islands.
Main conclusions  Results showed mixed support for community-wide character displacement in New Zealand skinks. Differences in body sizes appear to reflect the use of different-sized prey. Even differentiation in body sizes on one island suggests that species coexistence is facilitated by interspecific differences in prey size selection. However, little support was found on other islands, suggesting that other factors, such as interspecific differences in habitat selection and/or diurnal activity patterns, may interact with differences in prey size selection to promote coexistence among New Zealand skinks.     

Biogeography of body size in Pacific island birds

Many insular vertebrates have undergone rapid and dramatic changes in body size compared to their mainland counterparts. Here we explore the relationship between two well known patterns of island body size – the tendency for large‐bodied species to dwarf and small‐bodied species to get larger on islands, known as the “island rule”, and the scaling of maximum and minimum body size of island assemblages with island area. Drawing on both fossil and modern data, we examined the relationship between body size and island area in Pacific island birds, both within clades and at the island assemblage level. We found that the size of the smallest bird on each island decreased with island area while the maximum body size increased with island area. Similarly, within clades the body size of small‐bodied groups decreased and large‐bodied groups increased from small to large islands, consistent with the island rule. However, the magnitude of size change within clades was not sufficient to explain the overall scaling of maximum size with island area. Instead, the pattern was driven primarily by the evolution of very large, flightless birds on large islands. Human‐mediated extinctions on islands over the past few millennia severely impacted large, flightless birds, to the effect that this macroecological pattern has been virtually erased. After controlling for effects of biogeographic region and island area, we found island productivity to be the best predictor of maximum size in flightless birds. This result, and the striking similarities in maximum body size between flightless birds and island mammals, suggests a common energetic mechanism linking body size and landmass area in both the island rule and the scaling of island body size extremes.     

Body size of insular carnivores: evidence from the fossil record

Aim Our goals here are to: (1) assess the generality of one aspect of the island rule – the progressive trend towards decrease in size in larger species – for fossil carnivores on islands; (2) offer causal explanations for this pattern and deviations from it – as far as fossil carnivores are concerned; and (3) estimate the speed of this trend. Location Oceanic and oceanic‐like islands world‐wide. Methods Body size estimates of fossil insular carnivores and of their phylogenetically closest mainland relative were obtained from our own data and the published literature. Our dataset consisted of 18 species from nine islands world‐wide. These data were used to test whether the body size of fossil insular carnivores varies as a function of body size of the mainland species in combination with characteristics of the island ecosystem. Results Dwarfism was observed in two canid species. Moderate decrease in body mass was observed in one hyena species. Gigantism was observed in one otter species. Moderate body mass increase was observed in two otter species, one galictine mustelid and perhaps one canid. Negligible or no change in body mass at all was observed in five otter species, three galictine mustelids and one genet. Size changes in teeth do not lag behind in comparison to skeletal elements in the dwarfed canids. The evolutionary speed of dwarfism in a canid lineage is low. Main conclusions Size change in fossil terrestrial insular carnivores was constrained by certain ecological conditions, especially the availability of prey of appropriate body size. When such alternative prey was not available, the carnivores retained their mainland size. The impact of competitive carnivores seems negligible. The case of (semi‐)aquatic carnivores is much less clear. The species that maintained their ancestral body mass may have changed their diet, as is evidenced by their dentition. Among the otters, one case of significant size increase was observed, perhaps best explained as being due to it entering the niche of an obligate aquatic otter. Dwarfism was not observed in otters. The island rule seems to apply to fossil carnivores, but with exceptions. The dependency of the island rule on resource availability is emphasized by the present study.     

Predation selectively culls medium-sized species from island mammal faunas

Globally, elevated extinction risk in mammals is strongly associated with large body size. However, in regions where introduced predators exert strong top-down pressure on mammal populations, the selectivity of extinctions may be skewed towards species of intermediate body size, leading to a hump-shaped relationship between size and extinction risk. The existence of this kind of extinction pattern, and its link to predation, has been contentious and difficult to demonstrate. Here, we test the hypothesis of a hump-shaped body size–extinction relationship, using a database of 927 island mammal populations. We show that the size-selectivity of extinctions on many islands has exceeded that expected under null models. On islands with introduced predators, extinctions are biased towards intermediate body sizes, but this bias does not occur on islands without predators. Hence, on islands with a large-bodied mammal fauna, predators are selectively culling species from the lower end of the size distribution, and on islands with a small-bodied fauna they are culling species from the upper end. These findings suggest that it will be difficult to use predictable generalizations about extinction patterns, such as a positive body size–extinction risk association, to anticipate future species declines and plan conservation strategies accordingly.     

One size does not fit all: no evidence for an optimal body size on islands

Aim Optimal body size theories predict that large clades have a single, optimal, body size that serves as an evolutionary attractor, with the full body size spectrum of a clade resulting from interspecific competition. Because interspecific competition is believed to be reduced on islands, such theories predict that insular animals should be closer to the optimal size than mainland animals. We test the resulting prediction that insular clade members should therefore have narrower body size ranges than their mainland relatives. Location World‐wide. Methods We used body sizes and a phylogenetic tree of 4004 mammal species, including more than 200 species that went extinct since the last ice age. We tested, in a phylogenetically explicit framework, whether insular taxa converge on an optimal size and whether insular clades have narrow size ranges. Results We found no support for any of the predictions of the optimal size theory. No specific size serves as an evolutionary attractor. We did find consistent evidence that large (> 10 kg) mammals grow smaller on islands. Smaller species, however, show no consistent tendency to either dwarf or grow larger on islands. Size ranges of insular taxa are not narrower than expected by chance given the number of species in their clades, nor are they narrower than the size ranges of their mainland sister clades – despite insular clade members showing strong phylogenetic clustering. Main conclusions The concept of a single optimal body size is not supported by the data that were thought most likely to show it. We reject the notion that inclusive clades evolve towards a body‐plan‐specific optimum.     

Relative effects of climate change, isolation and competition on body-size evolution in the Japanese field mouse, Apodemus argenteus

Aim This paper examines body size variation in both recent and Quaternary populations of the Japanese field mouse Apodemus argenteus in order to assess the relative effects on body size of climate change, isolation and competitive interactions with its congeneric A. speciosus. Both temporal (since the Last Glacial Maximum, LGM) and spatial (over the Japanese archipelago) scales are considered. Location The small field mouse is widespread in Japan, and the specimens examined were collected from 10 localities on islands of widely differing area (from 4 km² to 230,510 km²) and at latitudes ranging from 30.3° N to 45.1° N. Methods The effects of geographical factors such as latitude and island area on the size variation of A. argenteus were investigated, using the lower incisor size. In addition, the size of some specimens from two Quaternary localities was compared with the size of the extant specimens. Evolutionary rates of size change since the LGM were calculated in darwins. Hutchinson size ratios were used to examine the pattern of variation of the size segregation between the two Japanese field mice, A. argenteus and A. speciosus, in relation to time and space. Results There was a negative relationship between size and latitude among living A. argenteus populations. In addition, there was no effect of island area on body size, especially at higher latitudes. At lower latitudes, A. argenteus were larger on smaller islands, although this trend was not statistically significant. Quaternary specimens of A. argenteus were smaller in size than their living representatives. The interspecific size ratio between the two Japanese Apodemus was larger on smaller islands and at higher latitudes, and there has been a decrease in the size ratio between the two Apodemus since the LGM. Lastly, in accordance with the theory of character displacement, the small A. argenteus was larger in allopatry than in sympatry, whereas the large A. speciosus was smaller in allopatry than in sympatry. Main conclusions These results indicate that A. argenteus does not conform to Bergmann's rule or to the island rule. The variation in size for the small Japanese field mouse at both spatial and temporal scales may be related to climate change, with an additional effect of competition with the large field mouse, especially on smaller islands. The size convergence between the two Japanese Apodemus observed over the last 21,000 years may be explained by the diminution of available food resources due to the reduction of land mass areas following the LGM. It may also be the result of an evolution towards an optimal body size; a hypothesis previously proposed to explain the evolution of body size in island mammals. Lastly, the evolutionary rates of body size calculated for A. argenteus since the LGM are typical of rates calculated for other Quaternary mainland mammals, thus suggesting that the evolution in this species was not particularly rapid, as is often thought for island mammals.