| Literature DB >> 34580222 |
Thomas Merckx1,2, Matthew E Nielsen3, Janne Heliölä4, Mikko Kuussaari4, Lars B Pettersson5, Juha Pöyry4, Juha Tiainen6,7, Karl Gotthard8, Sami M Kivelä9.
Abstract
Urbanization is gaining force globally, which challenges biodiversity, and it has recently also emerged as an agent of evolutionary change. Seasonal phenology and life cycle regulation are essential processes that urbanization is likely to alter through both the urban heat island effect (UHI) and artificial light at night (ALAN). However, how UHI and ALAN affect the evolution of seasonal adaptations has received little attention. Here, we test for the urban evolution of seasonal life-history plasticity, specifically changes in the photoperiodic induction of diapause in two lepidopterans, Pieris napi (Pieridae) and Chiasmia clathrata (Geometridae). We used long-term data from standardized monitoring and citizen science observation schemes to compare yearly phenological flight curves in six cities in Finland and Sweden to those of adjacent rural populations. This analysis showed for both species that flight seasons are longer and end later in most cities, suggesting a difference in the timing of diapause induction. Then, we used common garden experiments to test whether the evolution of the photoperiodic reaction norm for diapause could explain these phenological changes for a subset of these cities. These experiments demonstrated a genetic shift for both species in urban areas toward a lower daylength threshold for direct development, consistent with predictions based on the UHI but not ALAN. The correspondence of this genetic change to the results of our larger-scale observational analysis of in situ flight phenology indicates that it may be widespread. These findings suggest that seasonal life cycle regulation evolves in urban ectotherms and may contribute to ecoevolutionary dynamics in cities.Entities:
Keywords: artificial light at night; diapause; reaction norm; urban evolution; urban heat island effect
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34580222 PMCID: PMC8501875 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2106006118
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 11.205
Fig. 1.Predicted outcomes of adaptive evolution on the photoperiodic reaction norm for diapause, following selection by the UHI or ALAN. The UHI should speed up development and extend the growing season, increasing the fitness of genotypes that can continue direct development later in the season, while ALAN should extend the experienced photoperiod cue, leading to direct development too late in the season to complete development (i.e., developmental trap) and decreasing the fitness of those genotypes. Thus, if the UHI is the main factor selecting for change, CDL—daylength at which 50% of a population enters diapause—should be shorter under laboratory common garden conditions in urban than in rural populations and vice versa if ALAN is the main factor (orange versus yellow dashed vertical lines, respectively).
Fig. 2.Map showing the locations of six cities (black dots) selected for phenological analyses based on citizen science data from monitoring and observational schemes. The colored dots indicate the urban (overlapping with black dots) and rural populations where C. clathrata (magenta) and P. napi (blue) were sampled for the experimental measurement of photoperiodic reaction norms of diapause induction.
Fig. 3.Field observation–based estimates of the flight period length (Top) and end (Bottom) in C. clathrata (Left) and P. napi (Right) in urban and rural areas in and around the three largest cities in both Finland and Sweden (note the difference in y-axis scaling between the species). In each panel, points are fitted values from a linear mixed-effects model (fixed effects presented in ; model-averaged fixed effects—that did not indicate an interaction between city region and environment—are used in the bottom right panel [see Statistical Analyses and for details]), and whiskers indicate 95% CIs of the fitted values, with lines connecting urban and surrounding rural areas for each of six differently colored cities. The city- and environment-specific locations from where we have additional experimental data (results illustrated in Fig. 4) are indicated with squares.
Fig. 4.Population-specific probability of direct development in C. clathrata (Left) and P. napi (Right) in relation to experimentally manipulated daylength. Each curve is for a different population (i.e., Helsinki rural, Helsinki urban, Stockholm rural, and Stockholm urban) and is drawn on the grounds of model-averaged fixed effects (Table 1) of generalized linear mixed-effects models, explaining the data. The shaded regions around the curves are 95% CIs. The fitted regression curves are for females. For males, the curves are similar, with no significant effect of sex in C. clathrata and only a small independent effect of sex in P. napi (see Table 1). Although centered daylength was used in the statistical analyses, we relocated the regression curves to the original daylengths for an easier interpretation of the figure. The horizontal dashed line indicates the probability of 0.5 so that the fitted regression curves intersect the dashed line at the CDL. Points indicate observed proportions of directly developing individuals in each population and daylength treatment, with circles being used for overlapping points.
Statistically significant (risk level 0.1) model-averaged (full average) fixed effects of generalized linear mixed-effects models (with binomial error distribution and logistic link function), explaining the probability of direct development in C. clathrata and P. napi in relation to experimentally manipulated daylength (centered daylength: centered DL) in urban and rural populations within Helsinki and Stockholm, with “Helsinki rural” and “female” coded as reference categories
| Species | Model parameter | Averaged estimate | 95% CI | ||
|
| Intercept | 0.0360 | −0.293, 0.365 | 0.214 | 0.83 |
| Centered DL | 0.707 | 0.516, 0.898 | 7.27 | <0.0001 | |
| Population (Helsinki urban) | 1.11 | 0.546, 1.67 | 3.85 | 0.00012 | |
| Population (Stockholm urban) | 2.02 | 1.41, 2.63 | 6.52 | <0.0001 | |
| Centered DL × Population (Helsinki urban) | 0.388 | 0.0470, 0.729 | 2.23 | 0.026 | |
| Centered DL × Population (Stockholm urban) | 0.319 | 0.00932, 0.629 | 2.02 | 0.043 | |
|
| Intercept | −1.63 | −2.33, −0.930 | 4.57 | <0.0001 |
| Centered DL | 3.16 | 2.35, 3.97 | 7.62 | <0.0001 | |
| Population (Helsinki urban) | 0.601 | −0.326, 1.53 | 1.27 | 0.20 | |
| Population (Stockholm rural) | 1.26 | 0.300, 2.22 | 2.58 | 0.010 | |
| Population (Stockholm urban) | 2.29 | 1.40, 3.18 | 5.02 | <0.0001 | |
| Sex (male) | −0.813 | −1.41, −0.22 | 2.68 | 0.0073 |
95% CIs derived by using the adjusted SE.
This is the predicted probability (in the scale of the linear predictor) when centered DL is 0, population is “Helsinki rural,” and sex is “female.”