Literature DB >> 29518255

Quantification and decomposition of environment-selection relationships.

Darren C Hunter1, Josephine M Pemberton2, Jill G Pilkington2, Michael B Morrissey1.   

Abstract

In nature, selection varies across time in most environments, but we lack an understanding of how specific ecological changes drive this variation. Ecological factors can alter phenotypic selection coefficients through changes in trait distributions or individual mean fitness, even when the trait-absolute fitness relationship remains constant. We apply and extend a regression-based approach in a population of Soay sheep (Ovis aries) and suggest metrics of environment-selection relationships that can be compared across studies. We then introduce a novel method that constructs an environmentally structured fitness function. This allows calculation of full (as in existing approaches) and partial (acting separately through the absolute fitness function slope, mean fitness, and phenotype distribution) sensitivities of selection to an ecological variable. Both approaches show positive overall effects of density on viability selection of lamb mass. However, the second approach demonstrates that this relationship is largely driven by effects of density on mean fitness, rather than on the trait-fitness relationship slope. If such mechanisms of environmental dependence of selection are common, this could have important implications regarding the frequency of fluctuating selection, and how previous selection inferences relate to longer term evolutionary dynamics.
© 2018 The Author(s). Evolution © 2018 The Society for the Study of Evolution.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Environmental heterogeneity; natural selection; phenotypic selection coefficients; quantitative genetics

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29518255     DOI: 10.1111/evo.13461

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  4 in total

1.  No evidence that warmer temperatures are associated with selection for smaller body sizes.

Authors:  Adam M Siepielski; Michael B Morrissey; Stephanie M Carlson; Clinton D Francis; Joel G Kingsolver; Kenneth D Whitney; Loeske E B Kruuk
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Natural selection fluctuates at an extremely fine spatial scale inside a wild population of snapdragon plants.

Authors:  Pascal Marrot; Mathieu Latutrie; Jésaëlle Piquet; Benoit Pujol
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.171

3.  Patterns of environmental variance across environments and traits in domestic cattle.

Authors:  Mads F Schou; Torsten N Kristensen; Ary A Hoffmann
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 5.183

4.  Biotic and anthropogenic forces rival climatic/abiotic factors in determining global plant population growth and fitness.

Authors:  William F Morris; Johan Ehrlén; Johan P Dahlgren; Alexander K Loomis; Allison M Louthan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 11.205

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.