Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 188, Issue 1, pp 97–106 | Cite as

Trade-offs between larval survival and adult ornament development depend on predator regime in a territorial dragonfly

  • Michael P. Moore
  • Ryan A. Martin
Behavioral ecology –original research

Abstract

Trade-offs between juvenile survival and the development of sexually selected traits can cause ontogenetic conflict between life stages that constrains adaptive evolution. However, the potential for ecological interactions to alter the presence or strength of these trade-offs remains largely unexplored. Antagonistic selection over the accumulation and storage of resources could be one common cause of environment-specific trade-offs between life stages: higher condition may simultaneously enhance adult ornament development and increase juvenile vulnerability to predators. We tested this hypothesis in an ornamented dragonfly (Pachydiplax longipennis). Higher larval body condition indeed enhanced the initial development of its intrasexually selected wing coloration, but was opposed by viability selection in the presence of large aeshnid predators. In contrast, viability selection did not oppose larval body condition in pools when aeshnids were absent, and was not affected when we manipulated cannibalism risk. Trade-offs between larval survival and ornament development, mediated through the conflicting effects of body condition, therefore occurred only under high predation risk. We additionally characterized how body condition influences several traits associated with predator avoidance. Although body condition did not affect burst distance, it did increase larval abdomen size, potentially making larvae easier targets for aeshnid predators. As high body condition similarly increases vulnerability to predators in many other animals, predator-mediated costs of juvenile resource accumulation could be a common, environment-specific limitation on the elaboration of sexually selected traits.

Keywords

Ecological agents of selection Ontogenetic conflict Natural selection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work could not have been completed without technical assistance from C. Lis, L. Robinson, A. Wiecek, and H. Rollins. We thank A. Gilmore for generously sharing data on fat stores. We also thank A. Locci and the Squire Valleevue Farm staff, especially S. Brown and J. Miller, for providing access to all field sites and maintaining an exceptionally well-mowed area for our wading pools. Critical feedback from M. Dugas, S. Diamond, L. Chick, A. Perez, S. Peacor, several anonymous reviewers, and the Case Western Reserve University Ecology and Evolution reading group greatly improved the manuscript. MPM was funded in part by a GAANN fellowship.

Author contribution statement

MPM designed the experiment, collected and analyzed all data, and wrote the manuscript. RAM discussed experimental design, analyses, and manuscript revisions.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All applicable institutional and/or national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Supplementary material

442_2018_4171_MOESM1_ESM.docx (356 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 355 kb)

References

  1. Anderson TL, Semlitsch RD (2016) Top predators and habitat complexity alter an intraguild predation module in pond communities. J Anim Ecol 85:548–588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold SJ, Wade MJ (1984) On the measurement of natural and sexual selection — theory. Evolution 38:709–719CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates D, Machler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2014) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.0-6. http://CRAN.R-project.org/packagel/4lme4. Accessed 14 Jan 2015
  5. Brooks R (2000) Negative genetic correlation between male sexual attractiveness and survival. Nature 406:67–70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Calsbeek R, Goedert D (2017) Performance tradeoffs, ontogenetic conflict, and multisport athletes: how is an ironman triathlete like a frog? Integr Comp Biol 57:207–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Caruso CM, Martin RA, Sletvold N, Morrissey MB, Wade MJ, Augustine KE et al (2017) What are the environmental determinants of phenotypic selection? A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Am Nat 190:363–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Catania SVL, McCauley SJ (2015) Evaluating the use of coded-wire tags in individually marking Odonata larvae. Can Entomol 148:371–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chenoweth SF, Hunt J, Rundle HD (2012) Analyzing and comparing the geometry of individual fitness surfaces. In: Svensson EI, Calsbeek R (eds) The adaptive landscape in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 126–149Google Scholar
  10. Chippindale AK, Gibson JR, Rice WR (2001) Negative genetic correlation for adult fitness between sexes reveals ontogenetic conflict in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:1671–1675CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Corbet PS (1999) Dragonflies: behavior and ecology of Odonata. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  12. Cornwallis CK, Uller T (2010) Towards an evolutionary ecology of sexual traits. Trends Ecol Evol 25:145–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Crean AJ, Monro K, Marshall DJ (2011) Fitness consequences of larval traits persist across the metamorphic boundary. Evolution 65:3079–3089CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Crumrine PW, Switzer PV, Crowley PH (2008) Structure and dynamics of odonate communities: assessing habitat, responding to risk, and enabling reproduction. In: Córdoba-Aguilar A (ed) Dragonflies and damselflies: model organisms for ecological and evolutionary research. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Debecker S, Sommaruga R, Maes T, Stoks R (2015) Larval UV exposure impairs adult immune function through trade-off with larval investment in cuticular melanin. Funct Ecol 29:1292–1299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Endler JA (1980) Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution 34:76–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Endler JA (1992) Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Am Nat 139:S125–S153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fedorka KM, Lee V, Winterhalter WE (2013) Thermal environment shapes cuticle melanism and melanin-based immunity in the ground cricket Allonemobius socius. Evol Ecol 27:521–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gosler AG, Greenwood JJD, Perrins C (1995) Predation risk and the cost of being fat. Nature 377:621–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grether GF (1996a) Sexual selection and survival selection on wing coloration and body size in the rubyspot damselfly Hetaerina americana. Evolution 50:1939–1948CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Grether GF (1996b) Intrasexual selection alone favors a sexually dimorphic ornament in the rubyspot damselfly Hetaerina americana. Evolution 50:1949–1957CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hadfield JD (2008) Estimating evolutionary parameters when viability selection is operating. Proc R Soc B 275:723–734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Heinen-Kay JL, Morris KE, Ryan NA, Byerley SL, Venezia RE, Peterson MN, Langerhans RB (2015) A tradeoff between natural and sexual selection underlies diversification of a sexual signal. Behav Ecol 26:533–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hine E, McGuigan K, Blows MW (2011) Natural selection stops the evolution of male attractiveness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:3659–3664CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hopper KR, Crowley PH, Kielman D (1996) Density dependence, hatching synchrony, and within-cohort cannibalism in young dragonfly larvae. Ecology 77:191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jakob EM, Marshall SE, Uetz GW (1996) Estimating fitness: a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos 77:61–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Janzen FJ, Stern HS (1998) Logistic regression for empirical studies of multivariate selection. Evolution 52:1564–1571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Jennions MD, Møller AP, Petrie M (2001) Sexually selected traits and adult survival: a meta-analysis. Q Rev Biol 76:3–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnson DW, Hixon MA (2011) Sexual and lifetime selection on body size in a marine fish: the importance of life-history trade-offs. J Evol Biol 24:1653–1663CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kasumovic MM (2013) The multidimensional consequences of the juvenile environment: towards an integrative view of the adult phenotype. Anim Behav 85:1049–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Koenig WD, Albano SS (1987) Lifetime reproductive success, selection, and the opportunity for selection in the white-tailed skimmer Plathemis lydia (Odonata: Libellulidae). Evolution 41:22–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Kotiaho JS (2001) Costs of sexual traits: a mismatch between theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Biol Rev 76:365–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Langerhans RB, DeWitt TJ (2004) Shared and unique features of evolutionary diversification. Am Nat 164:335–349CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Lessells CM, Boag PT (1987) Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marchinko KB (2009) Predation’s role in repeated phenotypic and genetic divergence of armor in threespine stickleback. Evolution 63:127–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Marshall DJ, Morgan SG (2011) Ecological and evolutionary consequences of linked life-history stages in the sea. Curr Biol 21:R718–R725CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Martin RA, Riesch R, Heinen-Kay JL, Langerhans RB (2014) Evolution of male coloration during a post-pleistocene radiation of Bahamas mosquitofish (Gambusia hubbsi). Evolution 68:397–411CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. McCauley SJ, Davis CJ, Relyea RA, Yurewicz KL, Skely DK, Werner EE (2008) Metacommunity patterns in larval odonates. Oecologia 158:329–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Miehls AJ, Peacor SD, McAdam AG (2014) Gape-limited predators as agents of selection on the defensive morphology of an invasive invertebrate. Evolution 68:2633–2643CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mikolawjewski DJ, Johansson F, Wohlfahrt B, Stoks R (2006) Invertebrate predation selects for the loss of a morphological antipredator trait. Evolution 60:1306–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miller CW, Svensson EI (2014) Sexual selection in complex environments. Annu Rev Entomol 59:427–445CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Mitchell TS, Warner DA, Janzen FJ (2013) Phenotypic and fitness consequences of maternal nest-site choice across multiple early life stages. Ecology 94:336–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Moczek AP, Nijhout HF (2003) Rapid evolution of a polyphenic threshold. Evol Dev 5:259–268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Mojica JP, Kelly JK (2010) Viability selection prior to trait expression is an essential component of natural selection. Proc R Soc B 277:2945–2950CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Monro K, Marshall DJ (2014) Faster is not always better: selection on growth rate fluctuates across life history and environments. Am Nat 183:798–809CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore AJ (1990) The evolution of sexual dimorphism by sexual selection: the separate effects of intrasexual selection and intersexual selection. Evolution 44:315–331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Moore MP, Martin RA (2016) Intrasexual selection favours an immune-correlated color ornament in a dragonfly. J Evol Biol 29:2256–2265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Moore MP, Riesch R, Martin RA (2016) The predictability and magnitude of life-history divergence to ecological agents of selection: a meta-analysis in livebearing fishes. Ecol Lett 19:435–442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Moore MP, Lis C, Martin RA (2018) Larval body condition regulates predator-induced life-history variation in a dragonfly. Ecology 99:224–230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Morehouse NI (2014) Condition-dependent ornaments, life histories, and the evolving architecture of resource-use. Integr Comp Biol 54:591–600CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Morrissey MB, Sakrejda K (2013) Unification of regression-based methods for the analysis of natural selection. Evolution 67:2094–2100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Morrissey MB, Sakrejda K (2014) gsg: calculation of selection coefficients. R package version 2.0. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=gsg. Accessed 17 Aug 2017
  54. Oke KB, Rolshausen G, LeBlond C, Hendry AP (2017) How parallel is parallel evolution? A comparative analysis in fishes. Am Nat 190:1–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Paulson D (2012) Dragonflies and damselflies of the East. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  56. Persson L, De Roos A, Claessen D, Byström P, Lövgren J, Sjögren S, Svanbäck R, Wahlström E, Westman E (2003) Gigantic cannibals driving a whole-lake trophic cascade. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:4035–4039CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Rasband WS (2012) ImageJ. U.S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda. http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/
  58. Robinson MR, Pilkington JG, Clutton-Brock TH, Pemberton JM, Kruuk LEB (2008) Environmental heterogeneity generates fluctuating selection on a secondary sexual trait. Curr Biol 18:751–757CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Schluter D, Nychka D (1994) Exploring fitness surfaces. Am Nat 143:597–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schluter D, Price TD, Rowe L (1991) Conflicting selection pressures and life history trade-offs. Proc R Soc B 246:11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sherman KJ (1983) The adaptive significance of postcopulatory mate guarding in a dragonfly, Pachydiplax longipennis. Anim Behav 31:1107–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Siepielski AM, Morrissey MB, Buoro M, Carlson SM, Caruso CM, Clegg SM et al (2017) Precipitation drives global variation in natural selection. Science 355:959–962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Sinervo B, Calsbeek R (2003) Physiological epistasis, ontogenetic conflict and natural selection on physiology and life history. Integr Comp Biol 43:419–430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Stoks R, Córdoba-Aguilar A (2012) Evolutionary ecology of Odonata: a complex life cycle perspective. Annu Rev Entomol 57:249–265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Strobbe F, McPeek MA, De Block M, De Meester L, Stoks R (2009) Survival selection on escape performance and its underlying phenotypic traits: a case of many-to-one mapping. J Evol Biol 22:1172–1182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Suhonen J, Rantala MJ, Honkavaara J (2008) Territoriality in odonates. In: Córdoba-Aguilar A (ed) Dragonflies and damselflies: model organisms for ecological and evolutionary research. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 203–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Svensson EI, Kristofferson L, Oskarsson K, Bensch S (2004) Molecular population divergence and sexual selection on morphology in the banded demoiselle (Calopteryx splendens). Heredity 93:423–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. R Development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org
  69. Van Buskirk J, McCollum SA, Werner EE (1997) Natural selection for environmentally induced phenotypes in tadpoles. Evolution 51:1983–1992CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. van Tienderen PH (2000) Elasticities and the link between demographic and evolutionary dynamics. Ecology 81:666–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wissinger SA (1988) Spatial distribution, life history, and estimates of survivorship in a fourteen-species assemblage of larval dragonflies (Odonata: Anisoptera). Freshw Biol 20:329–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wissinger SA (1992) Niche overlap and the potential for competition and intraguild predation between size-structured populations. Ecology 73:1431–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wissinger SA, Whiteman HH, Denoël M, Mumford ML, Aubee CB (2010) Consumptive and nonconsumptive effects of cannibalism in fluctuating age-structured populations. Ecology 91:549–559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Zamora-Camacho FJ, Reguera S, Rubiño-Hispán MV, Moreno-Rueda G (2014) Effects of limb length, body mass, gender, gravidity, and elevation on escape speed lizard Psammodromus algirus. Evol Biol 41:509–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zuk M, Rotenberry JT, Tinghitella RM (2006) Silent night: adaptive disappearance of a sexual signal in a parasitized population of field crickets. Biol Lett 2:521–524CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations