Journal of Mathematical Biology

, Volume 72, Issue 4, pp 1081–1099 | Cite as

Mutual invadability near evolutionarily singular strategies for multivariate traits, with special reference to the strongly convergence stable case

  • Stefan A. H. Geritz
  • Johan A. J. Metz
  • Claus Rueffler
Article

Abstract

Over the last two decades evolutionary branching has emerged as a possible mathematical paradigm for explaining the origination of phenotypic diversity. Although branching is well understood for one-dimensional trait spaces, a similarly detailed understanding for higher dimensional trait spaces is sadly lacking. This note aims at getting a research program of the ground leading to such an understanding. In particular, we show that, as long as the evolutionary trajectory stays within the reign of the local quadratic approximation of the fitness function, any initial small scale polymorphism around an attracting invadable evolutionarily singular strategy (ess) will evolve towards a dimorphism. That is, provided the trajectory does not pass the boundary of the domain of dimorphic coexistence and falls back to monomorphism (after which it moves again towards the singular strategy and from there on to a small scale polymorphism, etc.). To reach these results we analyze in some detail the behavior of the solutions of the coupled Lande-equations purportedly satisfied by the phenotypic clusters of a quasi-n-morphism, and give a precise characterisation of the local geometry of the set \(\mathcal D\) in trait space squared harbouring protected dimorphisms. Intriguingly, in higher dimensional trait spaces an attracting invadable ess needs not connect to \(\mathcal D\). However, for the practically important subset of strongly attracting ess-es (i.e., ess-es that robustly locally attract the monomorphic evolutionary dynamics for all possible non-degenerate mutational or genetic covariance matrices) invadability implies that the ess does connect to \(\mathcal D\), just as in 1-dimensional trait spaces. Another matter is that in principle there exists the possibility that the dimorphic evolutionary trajectory reverts to monomorphism still within the reign of the local quadratic approximation for the invasion fitnesses. Such locally unsustainable branching cannot occur in 1- and 2-dimensional trait spaces, but can do so in higher dimensional ones. For the latter trait spaces we give a condition excluding locally unsustainable branching which is far stricter than the one of strong convergence, yet holds good for a relevant collection of published models. It remains an open problem whether locally unsustainable branching can occur around general strongly attracting invadable ess-es.

Keywords

Adaptive dynamics Evolutionary branching Multi-dimensional trait space Mutual invadability Strong attractivity Local dimorphic divergence 

Mathematics Subject Classification

92D15 92D25 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the help of Mattias Siljestam with the numerics (including a number of stochastic simulations the results of which did not end up in the paper, but which were quite informative as they eventually suggested that locally unsustainable branching cannot occur in two-dimensional trait spaces). This work benefitted from the support from the “Chair Modélisation Mathématique et Biodiversité of Veolia Environnement-Ecole Polytechnique-Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle-Fondation X”.

References

  1. Ackermann M, Doebeli M (2004) Evolution of niche width and adaptive diversification. Evolution 58:2599–2612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beltman JB, Metz JAJ (2005) Speciation: more likely through a genetic or through a learned habitat preference? Proc R Soc Lond B 272:1455–1463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Champagnat N (2003) Convergence of adaptive dynamics \(n\)-morphic jump processes to the canonical equation and degenerate diffusion approximation. Preprint of the University of Nanterre (Paris 10) No. 03/7Google Scholar
  4. Champagnat N, Méléard S (2011) Polymorphic evolution sequence and evolutionary branching. Prob Theory Relat Fields 151:45–94CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Christiansen FB, Loeschke V (1987) Evolution and intraspecific competition. III. One-locus theory for small additive gene effects and multidimensional resource qualities. Theor Popul Biol 31:33–46CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Collet P, Méléard S, Metz JAJ (2013) A rigorous model study of the adaptive dynamics of mendelian diploids. J Math Biol 67:569–607CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Dercole F, Geritz SAH (2015) Unfolding the resident invader dynamics of similar strategies. J Theor Biol (accepted) Google Scholar
  8. Dercole F, Rinaldi S (2008) Analysis of evolutionary processes: the adaptive dynamics approach and its applications. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  9. Dieckmann U, Law R (1996) The dynamical theory of coevolution: a derivation from stochastic ecological processes. J Math Biol 34:579–612CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Doebeli M (2011) Adaptive diversification. In: Monographs in population biology, vol 48. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  11. Doebeli M, Ispolatov I (2010) Complexity and diversity. Science 328:494–497CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Durinx M, Meszéna G, Metz JAJ (2008) Adapative dynamics for physiologically structured population models. J Math Biol 56:673–742CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferrière R, Gatto M (1995) Lyapunov exponents and the mathematics of invasion in oscillatory of chaotic populations. Theor Popul Biol 48:126–171CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Fisher RA (1958) The genetical theory of natural selection, 2nd edn. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Geritz SAH (2005) Resident-invader dynamics and the coexistence of similar strategies. J Math Biol 50:67–82CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Geritz SAH, Kisdi É, Meszéna G, Metz JAJ (1998) Evolutionarily singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree. Evol Ecol 12:35–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Geritz SAH, Metz JAJ, Kisdi É, Meszéna G (1997) Dynamics of adaptation and evolutionary branching. Phys Rev Lett 78:2024–2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ito HC, Shimada M (2007) Niche expansion: coupled evolutionary branching of niche position and width. Evol Ecol Res 9:675–695Google Scholar
  19. Lande R (1979) Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolution, applied to brain: body size allometry. Evolution 33:402–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lande R (1982) A quantitative genetic theory of life history evolution. Ecology 63:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leimar O (2001) Evolutionary change and darwinian demons. Selection 2:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leimar O (2009) Multidimensional convergence stability. Evol Ecol Res 11:191–208Google Scholar
  23. Méléard S, Tran VC (2009) Trait substitution sequence process and canonical equation for age-structured populations. J Math Biol 58:881–921CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Metz JAJ (2008) Fitness. In: Jørgensen S, Fath B (eds) Evolutionary ecology. Encyclopedia of ecology, vol 2. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1599–1612Google Scholar
  25. Metz JAJ (2014). Fitness. In: Reference module in earth systems and environmental sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.09361-1
  26. Metz JAJ, de Kovel CGF (2013) The canonical equation of adaptive dynamics for mendelian diploids and haplo-diploids. Interfaces Focus 3:20130025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Metz JAJ, Geritz SAH, Meszéna G, Jacobs FJA, Van Heerwaarden JS (1996) Adaptive dynamics: a geometrical study of the consequences of nearly faithful reproduction. In: van Strien S, Verduyn Lunel S (eds) Stochastic and spatial structures of dynamical systems. Proceedings of the Royal Dutch Academy of Science. North Holland, Dordrecht, pp 183–231. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ADN/Series.html
  28. Metz JAJ, Jansen VAA (2015) Adaptive dynamics for mendelian genetics: relating the speed of evolution to the effective population size (in prep) Google Scholar
  29. Metz JAJ, Nisbet RM, Geritz SAH (1992) How should we define ‘fitness’ for general ecological scenarios? Trends Ecol Evol 7:198–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ravigné V, Dieckmann U, Olivieri I (2009) Live where you thrive: joint evolution of habitat choice and local adaptation facilitates specialization and promotes diversity. Am Nat 174:E141–E169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rueffler C, Van Dooren TJM, Leimar O, Abrams PA (2006) Disruptive selection and then what? Trends Ecol Evol 21:238–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Svardal H, Rueffler C, Doebeli M (2014) Organismal complexity and the potential for evolutionary diversification. Evolution 68:3248–3259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Svardal H, Rueffler C, Hermisson J (2011) Comparing environmental and genetic variance as adaptive response to fluctuating selection. Evolution 65:2492–2513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tran VC (2006) Modéles particulaires stochastiques pour des problémes d’èvolution adaptative et pour l’approximation de solutions statistiques. Ph.D. thesis. Universitè Paris X-Nanterre, 12. http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00125100
  35. Vukics A, Asbóth J, Meszéna G (2003) Speciation in multidimensional evolutionary space. Phys Rev E 68:041903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wolfram Research, Inc. (2015) Mathematica 10.3. Champaign, IllinoisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan A. H. Geritz
    • 1
  • Johan A. J. Metz
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Claus Rueffler
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Mathematical Institute and Institute of BiologyLeiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Netherlands Centre for BiodiversityNaturalisLeidenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Evolution and Ecology ProgramInternational Institute of Applied Systems AnalysisLaxenburgAustria
  5. 5.Animal Ecology, Department of Ecology and GeneticsUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations