Missing fossils, molecular clocks and the origin of the Melastomataceae.

Abstract

In a recent analysis of the historical biogeography of Melastomataceae, Renner, Clausing, and Meyer (2001; American Journal of Botany 88(7): 1290–1300) rejected the hypothesis of a Gondwana origin. Using a fossil-calibrated chloroplast DNA (ndhF) phylogeny, they placed the early diversification of Melastomataceae in Laurasia at the Paleocene/Eocene boundary (ca. 55 Ma) and suggested that long-distance oceanic dispersals in the Oligocene and Miocene (34 to 5 Ma) account for its range expansion into South America, Africa, and Madagascar. Their critical assumption—that oldest northern mid-latitude melastome fossils reflect tribal ages and their geographic origins—may be erroneous, however, because of the sparse fossil record in the tropics. We show that rates of synonymous nucleotide substitutions derived by the Renner et al. (2001) model are up to three times faster than most published rates. Under a Gondwana-origin model advocated here, which includes dispersals from Africa to Southeast Asia via the ‘‘Indian ark’’ and emphasizes filter rather than either sweepstakes dispersal or strict vicariance, rates of nucleotide substitution fall within the range of published rates. We suggest that biogeographic reconstructions need to consider the paucity of Gondwanan fossils and that frequently overlooked interplate dispersal routes provide alternatives to vicariance, boreotropical dispersal, and long-distance oceanic dispersal as explanations for the amphi-oceanic disjunctions of many tropical rain forest plants.