Skip to main content

Table 2 Tests of timing of maturation for select plethodontid nodes (months)

From: Heterochrony repolarized: a phylogenetic analysis of developmental timing in plethodontid salamanders

Node/Mat Age M prob M hm M LBf F prob F hm F LBf
Node A: Spelerpini
0 to 11 0.14 −106.89 10.63 0.08 −105.06 9.80
12 to 23 0.28 −104.19 5.21 0.14 −102.58 4.84
24 to 35 0.39 −101.58 0.00 0.27 −102.08 0.00
36 to 47 0.16 −104.97 6.78 0.25 −100.15 3.85
48 to 59 0.03 −105.72 8.27 0.17 −102.60 4.88
≥60 0.00 −107.79 12.43 0.09 −102.72 5.13
Node B: Eurycea quadridigitata+ Edwards Plateau Eurycea
0 to 11 0.77 −100.86 0.00 0.67 −101.08 0.00
12 to 23 0.20 −101.57 1.40 0.27 −103.66 5.15
24 to 35 0.03 −102.59 3.45 0.06 −104.03 5.90
36 to 47 0.00 −109.53 17.33 0.00 −105.84 9.52
48 to 59 0.00 −112.52 23.31 0.00 −110.84 19.52
≥60 0.00 −112.69 23.65 0.00 −112.07 21.98
Node C: western Eurycea quadridigitata+ Edwards Plateau Eurycea
0 to 11 0.75 −100.58 0.00 0.68 −99.76 0.00
12 to 23 0.22 −101.17 1.18 0.27 −101.37 3.21
24 to 35 0.03 −104.83 8.50 0.05 −104.48 9.44
36 to 47 0.00 −111.80 22.45 0.00 −108.16 16.79
48 to 59 0.00 −112.65 24.13 0.00 −111.86 24.19
≥60 0.00 −112.73 24.29 0.00 −112.35 25.16
Node D: Edwards Plateau Eurycea
0 to 11 0.64 −100.58 0.00 0.61 −99.37 0.00
12 to 23 0.35 −102.10 3.04 0.36 −103.36 7.97
24 to 35 0.01 −108.61 16.06 0.03 −106.49 14.2
36 to 47 0.00 −112.55 23.95 0.00 −111.76 24.78
48 to 59 0.00 −112.769 24.37 0.00 −112.64 26.53
≥60 0.00 −112.79 24.42 0.00 −112.74 26.74
Node E: southern Edwards Plateau Eurycea
0 to 11 0.32 −101.58 0.90 0.34 −102.28 0.77
12 to 23 0.64 −101.13 0.00 0.61 −101.89 0.00
24 to 35 0.04 −107.75 13.23 0.05 −106.87 9.95
36 to 47 0.00 −112.74 23.22 0.00 −112.44 21.09
48 to 59 0.00 −112.80 23.34 0.00 −112.78 21.77
≥60 0.00 −112.81 23.36 0.00 −112.79 21.79
  1. Proportional probabilities (prob.) are from Bayesian reconstructions of six ordered maturation age categories (0 to 11, 12 to 23, 24 to 35, 36 to 47, 48 to 59, and ≥60 months) for males (M; Figure 5) and females (F; Figure 6). Model fitting comparisons were performed by fixing (‘fossilizing’) select nodes to the six alternative maturation age categories and comparing Log Bayes factors (LBf) to the lowest (best fitting) age category for the node based on the harmonic mean (hm).