Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 155–174 | Cite as

The evolution of life histories in spatially heterogeneous environments: Optimal reaction norms revisited

  • Tadeusz J. Kawecki
  • Stephen C. Stearns
Article

Summary

Natural populations live in heterogeneous environments, where habitat variation drives the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. The key feature of population structure addressed in this paper is the net flow of individuals from source (good) to sink (poor) habitats. These movements make it necessary to calculate fitness across the full range of habitats encountered by the population, rather than independently for each habitat. As a consequence, the optimal phenotype in a given habitat not only depends on conditions there but is linked to the performance of individuals in other habitats. We generalize the Euler-Lotka equation to define fitness in a spatially heterogeneous environment in which individuals disperse among habitats as newborn and then stay in a given habitat for life. In this case, maximizing fitness (the rate of increase over all habitats) is equivalent to maximizing the reproductive value of newborn in each habitat but not to maximizing the rate of increase that would result if individuals in each habitat were an isolated population. The new equation can be used to find optimal reaction norms for life history traits, and examples are calculated for age at maturity and clutch size. In contrast to previous results, the optimal reaction norm differs from the line connecting local adaptations of isolated populations each living in only one habitat. Selection pressure is higher in good and frequent habitats than in poor and rare ones. A formula for the relative importance of these two factors allows predictions of the habitat in which the genetic variance about the optimal reaction norm should be smallest.

Keywords

reaction norms phenotypic plasticity life history evolution age at maturity spatial heterogeneity fitness measures fitness sensitivity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrewartha, H. G. and Birch L. C. (1954)The Distribution and Abundance of Animals. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Bergerud, A. T. (1988) Caribou, wolves and man.Trends Ecol. Evol. 3, 68–72.Google Scholar
  3. Blondel, J., Perret, P., Maistre, M. and Dias, P. (1992) Do harlequin Mediterranean environments function as source sink for Blue Tits (Parus caeruleus L.)?Landscape Ecology 7, 213–9.Google Scholar
  4. Caswell, H. (1989a)Matrix Population Models. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Caswell, H. (1989b) Life-history strategies.Ecological Concepts. (J. M. Cherrett, ed.), pp. 285–308. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  6. Charlesworth, B. (1980)Evolution in Age-Structured Populations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Charlesworth, B. (1990) Optimization models, quantitative genetics, and mutation.Evolution 44: 520–38.Google Scholar
  8. Charnov, E. L. (1986) Life history evolution in a ‘recruitment population’: why are adult mortality rates constant?Oikos 47, 129–34.Google Scholar
  9. Charnov, E. L. (1989) Phenotypic evolution under Fisher's Fundamental Theorem of Natural Selection.Heredity 62, 113–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Charnov, E. L. (1990) On evolution of age at maturity and the adult lifespan.J. Evol. Biol. 3: 139–44.Google Scholar
  11. Charnov, E. L., los-den Hartogh, R. L., Jones T. and van dem Assem, J. (1981) Sex ratio evolution in a patchy environment.Nature 289, 27–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Connell, J. H. (1961) The influence of interspecific competition and other factors on the distribution of the barnacleChthamalus stellatus.Ecology 42, 710–23.Google Scholar
  13. Daan, S., Dijkstra C. and Tinbergen J. M. (1990) Family planning in the kestrel (Falco tinnunculus): the ultimate control of covariation of laying date and clutch size.Behavior 114, 83–116.Google Scholar
  14. Dhondt, A. A., Adriaensen, F., Matthysen, E. and Kempenaers, B. (1990) Nonadaptive clutch sizes in tits.Nature 348, 723–5.Google Scholar
  15. Emlen, J. M. (1970) Age specificity and ecological theory.Ecology 51, 588–601.Google Scholar
  16. Goodman, D. (1982) Optimal life histories, optimal notation, and the value of reproductive value.Am.Nat. 119, 803–23.Google Scholar
  17. Haldane, J. B. S. (1927) A mathematical theory of natural and artificial selection. Part IV.Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 23, 607–15.Google Scholar
  18. Hamilton, W. D. (1966) The moulding of senescence by natural selection.J. Theor. Biol. 12, 12–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hastings, A. (1978) Evolutionarily stable strategies and the evolution of life history strategies: I. Density dependent models.J. Theor. Biol. 75, 527–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Houston, A. I. and McNamara, J. M. (1992) Phenotypic plasticity as a state dependent life-history decision.Evol. Ecol. 6, 243–53.Google Scholar
  21. de Jong, G. (1990) Quantitative genetics of reaction norms.J. Evol. Biol. 3, 447–68.Google Scholar
  22. Kozlowski, J. and Uchmanski, J. (1987) Optimal individual growth and reproduction in perennial species with indeterminate growth.Evol. Ecol. 1, 214–30.Google Scholar
  23. Kozlowski, J. and Wiegert, R. G. (1986) Optimal allocation of energy to growth and reproduction.Theor. Pop. Biol. 29, 16–37.Google Scholar
  24. McNamara J. M. (1991). Optimal life histories: a generalization of the Perron-Frobenius Theorem.Theor. Pop. Biol. 40, 230–45.Google Scholar
  25. Pulliam, H. R. (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation.Am. Nat. 132, 652–61.Google Scholar
  26. Pulliam, H. R and Danielson, B. J. (1991) Sources, sinks, and habitat selection: a landscape perspective on population dynamics. Am. Nat.137, S50-S66.Google Scholar
  27. Reiter, J. and Le Boeuf, B. J. (1991) Life history consequences of variation in age at primiparity in northern elephant seals.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 28, 153–60.Google Scholar
  28. Rosenzweig, M. L. (1991) Habitat selection and population interactions: the search for mechanism.Am. Nat. 137, S5-S28.Google Scholar
  29. Seger, J. and Brockmann, H. J. (1987) What is bet-hedging?Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology. (P. H. Harvey and L. Partridge, eds) Vol. 4, pp 182–211. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  30. Schaffer, W. M. (1974) Selection for optimal life histories: the effects of age structure.Ecology 55, 291–303.Google Scholar
  31. Sibly, R. M. and Calow, P. (1986)Physiological Ecology of Animals. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  32. Sinervo, B. (1990) The evolution of maternal investment in lizards: An experimental and comparative analysis of egg size and its effects on offspring performance.Evolution 44, 279–94.Google Scholar
  33. Stearns, S. C. and Crandall, R. E. (1981) Quantitative predictions of delayed maturity.Evolution 35, 455–63.Google Scholar
  34. Stearns, S. C. and Koella, J. (1986) The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in life-history traits: predictions for norms of reaction for age- and size-at-maturity.Evolution 40, 893–913.Google Scholar
  35. Stearns, S. C. and Sage, R. D. (1980) Maladaptation in a marginal population of mosquito fish,Gambusia affinis.Evolution 34, 65–75.Google Scholar
  36. Via, S. and Lande, R. (1985) Genotype-environment interaction and the evolution of phenotypic plasticity.Evolution 39, 505–22.Google Scholar
  37. Wright, S. L., Crawford, C. B. and Anderson, J. L. (1988) Allocation of reproductive effort inMus domesticus: responses of offspring sex ratio and quality to social density and food availability.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 23, 357–65.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tadeusz J. Kawecki
    • 1
  • Stephen C. Stearns
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of ZoologyUniversity of BaselBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations