Advertisement

An eco-evolutionary system with naturally bounded traits

  • Roger CroppEmail author
  • John Norbury
ORIGINAL PAPER
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

We consider eco-evolutionary processes that include natural bounds on adaptive trait distributions. We implement ecological axioms, that a population grows if it is replete with resources, and doesn’t grow if it has none. These axioms produce natural bounds on the trait means that suggest that the assumption of gamma-distributed traits, where the trait variance is a function of the trait mean, is more appropriate than the usual assumption of normally distributed traits, where the trait variance is independent of the trait mean. We use a Lotka-Volterra model to simulate two plant populations, whose trait means evolve according to an evolutionary model, to simulate populations adapting during invasions. The results of our model simulations using gamma-distributed traits suggest that adapting populations may endure bottlenecks by increasing their fitness and recovering from near extinction to stably coexist. The inclusion of eco-evolutionary processes into ecosystem models generates K theory which predicts the long-term states of populations that make it through evolutionary bottlenecks. Otherwise, the final states of populations that do not make it through bottlenecks may be predicted by the non-evolutionary R theory.

Keywords

Eco-evolutionary modelling K theory Gamma-distribution Trait variance Naturally bounded traits Coexistence Competition Invasion 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and helpful comments that considerably improved this manuscript.

Author Contributions

Both authors contributed to the conception and design of the study, and the writing of the manuscript. RC did the numerical analysis and produced the figures and data.

Funding

RC thanks the Mathematical Institute of the University of Oxford for providing funding to support this research.

References

  1. Abrams PA (1991) The effects of interacting species on predator-prey coevolution. Theor Pop Biol 39:241–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abrams PA, Matsuda H, Harada Y (1993) Evolutionarily unstable fitness maxima and stable fitness minima of continuous traits. Evol Ecol 7:465–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abrams PA (1999) The adaptive dynamics of consumer choice. Am Nat 153:83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abrams PA, Matsuda H (2004) Consequences of behavioral dynamics for the population dynamics of predator-prey systems with switching. Popul Ecol 46:13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behrman KD, Kirkpatrick M (2011) Species range expansion by 749 beneficial mutations. J Evol Biol 24:665–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chesson P (2000) Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:343–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cortez MH, Ellner SP (2010) Understanding rapid evolution in predator-prey interactions using the theory of fast-slow dynamical systems. Am Nat 176(5):E109–E127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cortez MH (2016) How the magnitude of prey genetic variation alters predator-prey eco-evolutionary dynamics. Am Nat 188:329–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cortez MH, Patel S (2017) The effects of predator-evolution and genetic variation on predator-prey population-level dynamics. B Math Biol 79:1510–1538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coutinho RM, Klauschies T, Gaedke U (2016) Bimodal trait distributions with large variances question the reliability of trait-based aggregate model. Theor Ecol 9:389–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cropp RA, Norbury J (2015) Population interactions in ecology: a rule-based approach to modeling ecosystems in a mass-conserving framework. SIAM Rev 57(3):437–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dlugosch KM, Parker IM (2008) Founding events in species invasions: genetic variation, adaptive evolution, and the role of multiple introductions. Mol Ecol 17:431–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Facon B, Genton BJ, Shykoff J, Jarne P, Estoup A, David P (2006) A general eco-evolutionary framework for understanding bioinvasions. Trends Ecol Evol 21(3):130–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Falconer DS (1960) Introduction to quantitative genetics. Robert MacLeHose and CoGoogle Scholar
  15. Fisher R (1930) The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fox JW, Nelson WA, McCauley E (2010) Coexistence mechanisms and the paradox of the plankton: quantifying selection from noisy data. Ecol 91(6):1774–1786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fussman GF, Ellner SP, Hairston NG Jr (2003) Evolution as a critical component of plankton dynamics. P R Soc London B Bio 270:1015–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fussman GF, Loreau M, Abrams PA (2007) Eco-evolutionary dynamics of communities and ecosystems. Funct Ecol 21(3):465–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gaedke U, Klauschies T (2017) Analysing the shape of observed trait distributions enables a data-based moment closure of aggregate models. L&O Methods 15:979–994Google Scholar
  20. Gause G (1934) The struggle for existence. Williams & WilkinsGoogle Scholar
  21. Grafen A (2015) Biological fitness and the fundamental theorem of natural selection. Am Nat 186(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hutchinson GE (1961) The paradox of the plankton. Am Nat 95:137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kawecki TJ (2008) Adaptation to marginal habitats. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 39:321–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Klauschies T, Coutinho RM, Gaedke U (2018) A beta distribution-based moment closure enhances the reliability of trait-based aggregate models for natural populations and communities. Ecol Model 381:46–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kremer CT, Klausmeier CA (2013) Coexistence in a variable environment: eco-evolutionary perspectives. J Theor Biol 339:14–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lande R (1976) Natural selection and random genetic drift in phenotype evolution. Evolution 30:314–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lande R (1982) A quantitative genetic theory of life history evolution. Ecol 63:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee CE (2002) Evolutionary genetics of invasive species. Trends Ecol Evol 17(8):386–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Loreau M (2010) From populations to ecosystems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lotka AJ (1925) Elements of physical biology. Wilkins and KilkinsGoogle Scholar
  31. Merico A, Bruggeman B, Wirtz K (2009) A trait-based approach for downscaling complexity in plankton ecosystem models. Ecol Model 220:3001–3010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Osmond MM, Otto SP, Klausmeier CA (2017) When predators help prey adapt and persist in a changing environment. Am Nat 190: 83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pastor J (2017) Ecosystem ecology and evolutionary biology, a new frontier for experiments and models. Ecosystems 20:245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roman J, Darling JA (2007) Paradox lost: genetic diversity and the success of aquatic invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 22(9):454–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, McCauley DE, O’Neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN, Weller SG (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sasaki A, Dieckmann U (2011) Oligomorphic dynamics for analyzing the quantitative genetics of adaptive speciation. J Math Biol 63:601–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schoener TW (2011) The newest synthesis: understanding the interplay of evolutionary and ecological dynamics. Science 331:426–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tilman D (1977) Resource competition between planktonic algae: an experimental and theoretical approach. Ecol 58:338–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tilman D (1981) Tests of resource competition theory using four species of lake michigan algae. Ecol 62:802–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tilman D (2007) Interspecific competition and multispecies coexistence. In: May RM, McLean A (eds) Theoretical ecology. Oxford University Press, London, p 257Google Scholar
  41. Vasseur DA, Amarasekare P, Rudolf VHW, Levine JM (2011) Eco-evolutionary dynamics enable coexistence via neighbor-dependent selection. Am Nat 178(5):E96–E109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vitousek PM, Matson PA (2012) Nutrient cycling and biogeochemistry. In: Levin S (ed) The princeton guide to ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 330–339Google Scholar
  43. Volterra V (1926) Variations and fluctuations of the numbers of individuals in animal species living together. In: Chapman RN (ed) 1931 animal ecology. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Yoshida T, Hairston NG Jr, Ellner SP (2004) Evolutionary trade-off between defence against grazing and competitive ability in a simple unicellular alga, Chlorella vulgaris. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:1947–1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Griffith School of EnvironmentGriffith UniversityNathanAustralia
  2. 2.Mathematical InstituteUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations