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.     

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.     

Of mice and mammoths: generality and antiquity of the island rule

Aim

We assessed the generality of the island rule in a database comprising 1593 populations of insular mammals (439 species, including 63 species of fossil mammals), and tested whether observed patterns differed among taxonomic and functional groups.

Location

Islands world‐wide.

Methods

We measured museum specimens (fossil mammals) and reviewed the literature to compile a database of insular animal body size (S_i = mean mass of individuals from an insular population divided by that of individuals from an ancestral or mainland population, M). We used linear regressions to investigate the relationship between S_i and M, and ANCOVA to compare trends among taxonomic and functional groups.

Results

S_i was significantly and negatively related to the mass of the ancestral or mainland population across all mammals and within all orders of extant mammals analysed, and across palaeo‐insular (considered separately) mammals as well. Insular body size was significantly smaller for bats and insectivores than for the other orders studied here, but significantly larger for mammals that utilized aquatic prey than for those restricted to terrestrial prey.

Main conclusions

The island rule appears to be a pervasive pattern, exhibited by mammals from a broad range of orders, functional groups and time periods. There remains, however, much scatter about the general trend; this residual variation may be highly informative as it appears consistent with differences among species, islands and environmental characteristics hypothesized to influence body size evolution in general. The more pronounced gigantism and dwarfism of palaeo‐insular mammals, in particular, is consistent with a hypothesis that emphasizes the importance of ecological interactions (time in isolation from mammalian predators and competitors was 0.1 to > 1.0 Myr for palaeo‐insular mammals, but < 0.01 Myr for extant populations of insular mammals). While ecological displacement may be a major force driving diversification in body size in high‐diversity biotas, ecological release in species‐poor biotas often results in the convergence of insular mammals on the size of intermediate but absent species.     

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.     

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.     

The island rule: An assessment of biases and research trends

Aim

The island rule has been widely applied to a range of taxonomic groups, with some studies reporting supporting evidence but others questioning this hypothesis. To bring more clarity to this debate, we conducted a comparative analysis of the available literature, focussing on potential biases.

Location

Worldwide.

Methods

We performed a systematic review to identify studies testing the island rule and translated these studies’ outcomes, so that they follow a consistent approach. The studies were assessed for differences in their analysis of the island rule. We created an authorship network showing who published studies with whom on the topic and weighted the data based on co‐authorship and number of publications.

Results

We identified 143 relevant studies, finding a significantly lower frequency of supporting studies according to our consistent approach (50%) than the authors’ own statements (59%). Two core‐author groups could be identified with a strong publication record on the island rule. The first group has predominately published studies supporting the rule, whereas the other group has mainly published studies questioning it. According to a subsequent analysis excluding studies with a high risk of HARKing (hypothesizing after the results are known), the frequency of studies supporting the rule further dropped to 42%.

Main conclusions

Empirical support for the island rule is low, especially for non‐mammalian taxa and when using a consistent evaluation approach. Differences among studies in supporting versus questioning this hypothesis seem to be partly due to author‐related biases. Methods to address potential biases in studying ecological hypotheses are urgently needed. We offer such a method here.     

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.     

Insular avian adaptations on two Neotropical continental islands

Aim Most studies of avian insular adaptations have focused on oceanic islands, which may not allow characters that are insular adaptations to be teased apart from those that benefit dispersal and colonization. Using birds on continental islands, we investigated characters that evolved in situ in response to insular environments created by late Pleistocene sea level rise. Location Trinidad and Tobago and continental South America. Methods We weighed fresh flight muscles and measured museum skeletal specimens of seven species of birds common to the continental islands of Trinidad and Tobago. Results When corrected for body size, study species exhibited significantly smaller flight muscles, sterna and sternal keels on Tobago than on larger Trinidad and continental South America. Tobago populations were more ‘insular’ in their morphologies than conspecifics on Trinidad or the continent in other ways as well, including having longer bills, longer wings, longer tails and longer legs. Main conclusions We hypothesize that the longer bills enhance foraging diversity, the longer wings and tails compensate for the smaller pectoral assemblage (allowing for retention of volancy, but with a probable reduction in flight power and speed), and the longer legs expand perching ability. Each of these differences is likely to be related to the lower diversity and fewer potential predators and competitors on Tobago compared with Trinidad. These patterns of smaller flight muscles and larger bills, legs, wings and tails in island birds are not the results of selection for island dispersal and colonization, but probably arose from selection pressures acting on populations already inhabiting these islands.     

Atmospheric oxygen level and the evolution of insect body size

Insects are small relative to vertebrates, possibly owing to limitations or costs associated with their blind-ended tracheal respiratory system. The giant insects of the late Palaeozoic occurred when atmospheric PO₂ (aPO₂) was hyperoxic, supporting a role for oxygen in the evolution of insect body size. The paucity of the insect fossil record and the complex interactions between atmospheric oxygen level, organisms and their communities makes it impossible to definitively accept or reject the historical oxygen-size link, and multiple alternative hypotheses exist. However, a variety of recent empirical findings support a link between oxygen and insect size, including: (i) most insects develop smaller body sizes in hypoxia, and some develop and evolve larger sizes in hyperoxia; (ii) insects developmentally and evolutionarily reduce their proportional investment in the tracheal system when living in higher aPO₂, suggesting that there are significant costs associated with tracheal system structure and function; and (iii) larger insects invest more of their body in the tracheal system, potentially leading to greater effects of aPO₂ on larger insects. Together, these provide a wealth of plausible mechanisms by which tracheal oxygen delivery may be centrally involved in setting the relatively small size of insects and for hyperoxia-enabled Palaeozoic gigantism.     

The evolution of island gigantism and body size variation in tortoises and turtles

Extant chelonians (turtles and tortoises) span almost four orders of magnitude of body size, including the startling examples of gigantism seen in the tortoises of the Galapagos and Seychelles islands. However, the evolutionary determinants of size diversity in chelonians are poorly understood. We present a comparative analysis of body size evolution in turtles and tortoises within a phylogenetic framework. Our results reveal a pronounced relationship between habitat and optimal body size in chelonians. We found strong evidence for separate, larger optimal body sizes for sea turtles and island tortoises, the latter showing support for the rule of island gigantism in non-mammalian amniotes. Optimal sizes for freshwater and mainland terrestrial turtles are similar and smaller, although the range of body size variation in these forms is qualitatively greater. The greater number of potential niches in freshwater and terrestrial environments may mean that body size relationships are more complicated in these habitats.     

Evolutionary size changes in plants of the south‐west Pacific

Aim To investigate evolutionary changes in the size of leaves, stems and seeds of plants inhabiting isolated islands surrounding New Zealand. Location Antipodes, Auckland, Campbell, Chatham, Kermadec, Three Kings and Poor Knights Islands. Methods First, we compared the size of leaves and stems produced by 14 pairs of plant taxa between offshore islands and the New Zealand mainland, which were grown in a common garden to control for environmental effects. Similar comparisons of seed sizes were made between eight additional pairs of taxa. Second, we used herbarium specimens from 13 species pairs to investigate scaling relationships between leaf and stem sizes in an attempt to pinpoint which trait might be under selection. Third, we used herbarium specimens from 20 species to test whether changes in leaf size vary among islands located at different latitudes. Lastly, we compiled published records of plant heights to test whether insular species in the genus Hebe differed in size from their respective subgenera on the mainland. Results Although some evidence of dwarfism was observed, most insular taxa were larger than their mainland relatives. Leaf sizes scaled positively with stem diameters, with island taxa consistently producing larger leaves for any given stem size than mainland species. Leaf sizes also increased similarly among islands located at different latitudes. Size changes in insular Hebe species were unrelated to the average size of the respective subgenera on the mainland. Main conclusions Consistent evidence of gigantism was observed, suggesting that plants do not obey the island rule. Because our analyses were restricted to woody plants, results are also inconsistent with the ‘weeds‐to‐trees’ hypothesis. Disproportionate increases in leaf size relative to other plant traits suggest that selection may favour the evolution of larger leaves on islands, perhaps due to release from predation or increased intra‐specific competition.     

Comparative biogeography of mammals on islands

Insular faunas of terrestrial mammals and bats are examined on a worldwide basis to test the adequacy of equilibrium and historical legacy models as explanations for species-area relationships. Species numbers of bats on islands conform to predictions from equilibrium theory, whereby recurrent immigrations and extinctions influence species richness. By contrast, species numbers of terrestrial mammals on islands result from a historical legacy of very low immigration rates on oceanic islands (the faunas are colonization-limited) and by the fragmentation of once contiguous continental faunas to form relictual populations, which subsequently undergo extinctions, on landbridge islands (the faunas are extinction-limited). This explanation is supported by several lines of evidence: (1) z values (slopes of species-area curves) are lower for non-volant mammals on oceanic islands than for those on landbridge islands, but are the opposite for bats; (2) z values for non-volant mammals are lower than those for bats on oceanic islands, but are higher than those for bats on landbridge islands; and (3) landbridge island faunas are attenuated mainland faunas, whereas those on oceanic islands are ecologically incomplete. No support is found for alternative hypotheses to explain low species-area slopes for terrestrial mammals on oceanic islands.     

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.     

The evolution of body armor in mammals: plantigrade constraints of large body size

Predictions associated with opposing selection generating minimum variance in basal metabolic rate (BMR) in mammals at a constrained body mass (CBM; 358 g) were tested. The CBM is presumed to be associated with energetic constraints linked to predation and variable resources at intermediate sizes on a logarithmic mass scale. Opposing selection is thought to occur in response to energetic constraints associated with predation and unpredictable resources. As body size approaches and exceeds the CBM, mammals face increasing risks of predation and daily energy requirements. Fast running speeds may require high BMRs, but unpredictable and low resources may select for low BMRs, which also reduce foraging time and distances and thus predation risks. If these two selection forces oppose each other persistently, minimum BMR variance may result. However, extreme BMR outliers at and close to the CBM should be indicative of unbalanced selection and predator avoidance alternatives (escapers vs. defenders), and may therefore provide indirect support for opposing selection. It was confirmed that body armor in defenders evolves at and above the CBM, and armored mammals had significantly lower BMRs than their nonarmored counterparts. However, analyses comparing the BMR of escapers--the fastest nonarmored runners (Lagomorpha)--with similar-sized counterparts were inconclusive and were confounded by limb morphology associated with speed optimization. These analyses suggest that the risks and costs of predation and the speed limitations of the plantigrade foot may constrain the evolution of large body sizes in plantigrade mammals.     

Area, isolation and body size evolution in insular carnivores

Body sizes of insular mammals often differ strikingly from those of their mainland conspecifics. Small islands have reduced numbers of competitor and predator species, and more limited resources. Such reductions are believed to select for predictable changes in body sizes, with large mammals growing progressively smaller as island area decreases, while small ones grow progressively larger. Medium-sized mammals are thought to be largest on intermediate-sized islands. Increased isolation is seen as promoting insular gigantism. We searched for such patterns using a large database of insular carnivore specimens. Neither small nor large carnivores show a consistent area/body size relationship. Medium-sized carnivores are no more likely to attain large size on medium-sized islands then they are to be small there. We found no consistent patterns of body size variation in relation to isolation.     

Rapid evolution of great kiskadees on Bermuda: an assessment of the ability of the island rule to predict the direction of contemporary evolution in exotic vertebrates

Aim To determine whether an exotic bird species, the great kiskadee (Pitangus sulphuratus), has diverged in morphology from its native source population, and, if so, has done so in a manner predicted by the island rule. The island rule predicts that insular vertebrates will tend towards dwarfism or gigantism when isolated on islands, depending on their body size. For birds, the island rule predicts that species with body sizes below 70–120 g should increase in size. The great kiskadee has a mean mass of c. 60 g in its native range, therefore we predicted that it would increase in size within the exotic, and more insular, Bermudan range. Location The islands of Bermuda (exotic population) and Trinidad (native source population). Methods We took eight morphological measurements on 84 individuals captured in the exotic (Bermudan) population and 62 individuals captured in the native source (Trinidadian) population. We compared morphological metrics between populations using univariate and principal components analyses. We assessed whether the effects of genetic drift could explain observed differences in morphology. We calculated divergence rates in haldanes and darwins for comparison with published examples of contemporary evolution. Finally, we used mark–recapture analysis to determine the effects of the measured morphological characters on survivorship within the exotic Bermudan population. Results Individuals in the exotic Bermudan population have larger morphological dimensions than individuals in the native source population on Trinidad. The degree of divergence in body mass (g) and bill width (mm) is probably not due to genetic drift. This rate of divergence is nearly equal to that observed amongst well‐documented examples of contemporary bird evolution, and is within the mid‐range of rates reported across taxa. There is no clear effect of body size on survivorship as only one character (bill width) was found to have an influence on individual survivorship. Main conclusions Exotic species provide useful systems for examining evolutionary predictions over contemporary time‐scales. We found that divergence between the exotic and native populations of this bird species occurred over c. 17 generations, and was in the direction predicted by the island rule, a principle based on the study of native species.     

The island rule and the evolution of body size in the deep sea

Aim  Our goal is to test the generality of the island rule – a graded trend from gigantism in small-bodied species to dwarfism in large-bodied species – in the deep sea, a non-insular but potentially analogous system.
Location  Shallow-water and deep-sea benthic habitats in the western Atlantic Ocean from the North to South Poles.
Methods  We conducted regression analyses of body size of deep-sea gastropods species relative to their shallow-water congeners using measurements from the Malacolog ver. 3.3.3 database.
Results  Our results indicate that, consistent with the island rule, gastropod genera with small-bodied, shallow-water species have significantly larger deep-sea representatives, while the opposite is true for genera that are large-bodied in shallow water. Bathymetric body size clines within the deep sea are also consistent with predictions based on the island rule.
Main conclusions  Like islands, the deep sea is characterized by low absolute food availability, leading us to hypothesize that the island rule is a result of selection on body size in a resource-constrained environment. The body size of deep-sea species tends to converge on an optimal size for their particular ecological strategy and habitat.