| Literature DB >> 23777293 |
Ariel Gueijman1, Amir Ayali, Yoav Ram, Lilach Hadany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dispersal is a major factor in ecological and evolutionary dynamics. Although empirical evidence shows that the tendency to disperse varies among individuals in many organisms, the evolution of dispersal patterns is not fully understood. Previous theoretical studies have shown that condition-dependent dispersal may evolve as a means to move to a different environment when environments are heterogeneous in space or in time. However, dispersal is also a means to genetically diversify offspring, a genetic advantage that might be particularly important when the individual fitness is low. We suggest that plasticity in dispersal, in which fit individuals are less likely to disperse (Fitness-Associated Dispersal, or FAD), can evolve due to its evolutionary advantages even when the environment is homogeneous and stable, kin competition is weak, and the cost of dispersal is high.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23777293 PMCID: PMC3704926 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-13-125
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Empirical evidence of plastic dispersal
| Baguette et al., 2011 [ | Bog fritillary butterfly ( | Lower habitat quality raises the emigration rates and higher habitat quality raises the residence probability | Negative density-dependence as a cue; lower habitat quality (limited resources) |
| Vercken et al., 2012 [ | Juvenile common lizard ( | Frequencies of female classes affect dispersal decisions differentially among classes | Competition with superior conspecifics; conspecifics as environmental condition cue |
| Donohue, 2003[ | Holy’s Hawk’s-beard ( | Environmental stress results in a higher proportion of wind-dispersal structures | Lower habitat quality (limited resources) |
| Wender et al., 2005 [ | Density effects on maternal traits, such as plant height and fruits, have diverse effects on seed dispersal patterns | Density-dependence (with various effects) | |
| Hanski et al., 1991 [ | Siberian flying squirrels ( | Juvenile dispersal strategy changes with density from conditional to effectively non-conditional | Competition with superior individuals; density-dependence |
| Chaput-Bardy et al., 2010 [ | Damselfly ( | Females tend to disperse more often than males; emigration probability decreases with density; probability to move decreases when sex-ratio is male biased | Conspecific negative density-dependence (sex-ratio dependence); sex-dependence; |
| Clarke et al., 2008 [ | Chacma baboons ( | Males disperse; individual well-being combined with numbers of males and females is associated with differential and plastic dispersal strategies | Competition with conspecifics |
| Solmsen et al., 2011 [ | African striped mice ( | Locally inferior males disperse with a higher tendency | Competition with conspecifics; sex-dependence(?) |
| Shafer et al., 2011 [ | The mountain goat ( | Dispersers have lower observed heterozygosity compared to their population of origin | Inbreeding avoidance; heterosis; competition with conspecifics |
Figure 1Invasion of Fitness-Associated Dispersal. FAD invaded a population with a uniform dispersal rate throughout the parameter range tested (p ≤ 10-10 for each parameter set, exact binomial test), even though the average dispersal rate of the FAD and uniform subpopulations was held equal in each simulation (α = α). The figure shows the mean number of generations required for a FAD allele to increase in frequency from 0.01 to 0.8 in the cases where FAD took over the population (cells’ clarity increases with number of generations), for different values of the mean dispersal rate α (A: α = 0.01, B: α = 0.1, C: α = 0.3). As the cost of dispersal increases the relative advantage of fit FAD individuals that rarely disperse increases and it takes FAD less time to spread. As the average rate of dispersal increases (from panel A to C), FAD takeover occurs more rapidly when the dispersal cost is high, and more slowly when it is low. The effect of the dominance coefficient h was notable mostly at high dispersal rates together with low dispersal cost, where the number of heterozygotes was highest. Parameters: N ≥ 900 for α = 0.01; N ≥ 100 for all other values of α.
Figure 2Mean fitness under different dispersal rules. Mean fitness (±SE) at the steady state in populations homogeneous at the modifier locus as a function of the cost of dispersal c, the dominance coefficient h, and the mean dispersal rate α (A: α = 0.01, B: α = 0.1, C: α = 0.3). The mean fitness of UNI (open markers) decreases with the cost, because the cost is a component of the fitness. This effect becomes stronger as the dispersal rate α increases (from A to C) and the cost is paid more often. In contrast, the mean fitness of FAD (filled markers) increases with the cost of dispersal, because less fit individuals pay the cost more often and deleterious alleles are purged from the population. As the dominance coefficient h increases, the masking of deleterious mutations in a heterozygous state weakens and fitness is slightly reduced in most cases. Note that in most cases the error bars, showing the standard error of the mean, are smaller than the markers.
Figure 3Mean heterozygosity under different dispersal rules. Mean frequency (±SE) of deleterious heterozygous alleles at the steady state in populations homogeneous at the modifier locus - either FAD allele (filled markers) or UNI allele (open markers). Heterozygosity is plotted as a function of the cost of dispersal c, of the dominance coefficient h, and of the mean dispersal rate (A: α = 0.01, B: α = 0.1, C: α = 0.3). Heterozygosity decreases as h increases in all cases, because the masking of deleterious mutations in a heterozygous state is less efficient. Under both dispersal rules heterozygosity decreases with c, because fewer dispersers - which are likely to be outcrossers - survive; but the effect is stronger under FAD, because under FAD individuals carrying many deleterious mutations are more likely to disperse and pay the cost of dispersal. Comparing Figures 2 and 3, heterozygosity with FAD tends to be higher when mean fitness is lower, but not always to the same extent (see, for example, the effect of c in Figure 2C compared with Figure 3C). Note that in most cases the error bars, showing the standard error of the mean, are smaller than the markers.
Figure 4FAD can invade despite a long-term disadvantage. The figure shows the frequency and mean fitness of FAD (filled markers solid line and solid line, respectively) and UNI (open markers dashed line and dashed line, respectively) modifier alleles in an average of 100 runs as a function of time. For this parameter set, FAD succeeds in invading a population with a uniform dispersal rate (with equal average dispersal rates, α = α), but the invasion is accompanied by a substantial decrease in mean fitness for both the FAD and the UNI sub-populations. FAD invasion successfully invades because of the abandon-ship advantage: FAD modifier alleles tend to break away more effectively from deleterious genetic backgrounds through dispersal and outcrossing. They become associated with relatively good genetic backgrounds, consistently leading to higher mean fitness than UNI throughout the period of invasion. Parameters: cost of dispersal c = 0, dominance coefficient h = 0.2, average dispersal rate α = α =0.1. Qualitatively similar results were obtained for the introduction of FAD modifier alleles at a frequency of 0.01.
Figure 5FAD facilitates the evolution of increased dispersal rates. Each cell shows the outcome of invasions of FAD or UNI modifier alleles. Modifier alleles are introduced at 50% to a population dispersing at a uniform rate of α = 0.3 (A and B) or α = 0.1 (C and D). If both FAD and UNI invasions were significantly more successful than expected by a neutral allele, the cell is white. If no strategy was successful, the cell is black. If only FAD was successful, the cell is light grey. If FAD was maintained at polymorphism but did not take over, the cell is dark grey. FAD facilitates the evolution of increased dispersal rates of α = 0.4 (A), α = 0.5 (B), α = 0.2 (C) and α = 0.3 (D) under a wider parameter range than UNI. The difference is particularly noticeable when there is a cost to dispersal (c > 0) and when the masking of deleterious alleles is not very low (h > 0.1). Qualitatively identical results were obtained for the introduction of FAD alleles at a frequency of 0.01 for a sample of the parameter range.