12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Genetic evolution, plasticity, and bet-hedging as adaptive responses to temporally autocorrelated fluctuating selection: A quantitative genetic model : EVOLUTIONARY RESPONSES TO FLUCTUATING SELECTION

      Evolution
      Wiley-Blackwell

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Adaptive responses to autocorrelated environmental fluctuations through evolution in mean reaction norm elevation and slope and an independent component of the phenotypic variance are analyzed using a quantitative genetic model. Analytic approximations expressing the mutual dependencies between all three response modes are derived and solved for the joint evolutionary outcome. Both genetic evolution in reaction norm elevation and plasticity are favored by slow temporal fluctuations, with plasticity, in the absence of microenvironmental variability, being the dominant evolutionary outcome for reasonable parameter values. For fast fluctuations, tracking of the optimal phenotype through genetic evolution and plasticity is limited. If residual fluctuations in the optimal phenotype are large and stabilizing selection is strong, selection then acts to increase the phenotypic variance (bet-hedging adaptive). Otherwise, canalizing selection occurs. If the phenotypic variance increases with plasticity through the effect of microenvironmental variability, this shifts the joint evolutionary balance away from plasticity in favor of genetic evolution. If microenvironmental deviations experienced by each individual at the time of development and selection are correlated, however, more plasticity evolves. The adaptive significance of evolutionary fluctuations in plasticity and the phenotypic variance, transient evolution, and the validity of the analytic approximations are investigated using simulations.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Measurement of Selection on Correlated Characters

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Climate change, adaptation, and phenotypic plasticity: the problem and the evidence

            Many studies have recorded phenotypic changes in natural populations and attributed them to climate change. However, controversy and uncertainty has arisen around three levels of inference in such studies. First, it has proven difficult to conclusively distinguish whether phenotypic changes are genetically based or the result of phenotypic plasticity. Second, whether or not the change is adaptive is usually assumed rather than tested. Third, inferences that climate change is the specific causal agent have rarely involved the testing – and exclusion – of other potential drivers. We here review the various ways in which the above inferences have been attempted, and evaluate the strength of support that each approach can provide. This methodological assessment sets the stage for 11 accompanying review articles that attempt comprehensive syntheses of what is currently known – and not known – about responses to climate change in a variety of taxa and in theory. Summarizing and relying on the results of these reviews, we arrive at the conclusion that evidence for genetic adaptation to climate change has been found in some systems, but is still relatively scarce. Most importantly, it is clear that more studies are needed – and these must employ better inferential methods – before general conclusions can be drawn. Overall, we hope that the present paper and special issue provide inspiration for future research and guidelines on best practices for its execution.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations.

              How strong is phenotypic selection on quantitative traits in the wild? We reviewed the literature from 1984 through 1997 for studies that estimated the strength of linear and quadratic selection in terms of standardized selection gradients or differentials on natural variation in quantitative traits for field populations. We tabulated 63 published studies of 62 species that reported over 2,500 estimates of linear or quadratic selection. More than 80% of the estimates were for morphological traits; there is very little data for behavioral or physiological traits. Most published selection studies were unreplicated and had sample sizes below 135 individuals, resulting in low statistical power to detect selection of the magnitude typically reported for natural populations. The absolute values of linear selection gradients |beta| were exponentially distributed with an overall median of 0.16, suggesting that strong directional selection was uncommon. The values of |beta| for selection on morphological and on life-history/phenological traits were significantly different: on average, selection on morphology was stronger than selection on phenology/life history. Similarly, the values of |beta| for selection via aspects of survival, fecundity, and mating success were significantly different: on average, selection on mating success was stronger than on survival. Comparisons of estimated linear selection gradients and differentials suggest that indirect components of phenotypic selection were usually modest relative to direct components. The absolute values of quadratic selection gradients |gamma| were exponentially distributed with an overall median of only 0.10, suggesting that quadratic selection is typically quite weak. The distribution of gamma values was symmetric about 0, providing no evidence that stabilizing selection is stronger or more common than disruptive selection in nature.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Evolution
                Evolution
                Wiley-Blackwell
                00143820
                August 2015
                August 2015
                : 69
                : 8
                : 2034-2049
                Article
                10.1111/evo.12716
                26140293
                1581500e-75b0-43f7-8979-32581d3aa809
                © 2015

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article