Abstract
It is well known that there is a strong relationship among the environment, selection, and extinction, but the underlying role of genetics and genetic constraints in contributing to extinction is less appreciated. Integration of characters may enhance survivability for species, providing that selective pressure is parallel with the patterns of morphological integration. However, we hypothesize that, if the direction of selection shifts, integration may also prevent populations from responding quickly enough to the new directions of selection. This would lead to the inability to find a successful adaptive solution, causing downward pressure on the population, and ultimately, extinction. We test this model with a computer simulation, using an adaptive landscape model. We generate populations of varying levels of multivariate integration and generate selection pressures to test the ability of the populations to respond to selection both parallel and orthogonal to the axis of maximum variation. In these simulations, more highly integrated populations survived longer when selection was in the direction of maximum variation. However, when selection was closer to orthogonal to the axis of maximum variation, extinction was more rapid in highly integrated populations. These results suggest that integration may play a strong role in both survivability and extinction. Tightly integrated populations are highly persistent when selection pressure is close to the axis of maximum variation, which is expected to frequently be the case since integration is likely often a product of selection. However, these highly integrated taxa are more susceptible to extinction when the direction of selection shifts, and is closer to orthogonal to the axis of maximum variation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berger, R. (1986). Constraints for the evolution of functionally coupled characters: A nonlinear analysis of a phenotypic model. Evolution, 40, 182–193.
Berger, R., & Lynch, M. (1995). Evolution and extinction in a changing environment: A quantitative-genetic analysis. Evolution, 49, 151–163.
Cheverud, J. (1984). Quantitative genetics and developmental constraints on evolution by selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 110, 155–171.
Cheverud, J. (1996). Developmental integration and the evolution of pleiotropy. American Zoologist, 36, 44–50.
Chevin, L., Lande, R., & Mace, G. (2010). Adaptation, plasticity, and extinction in a changing environment: Towards a predictive theory. PLoS Biology, 8, e1000357.
Cody, M. (1966). A general theory of clutch size. Evolution, 20, 174–184.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species. London: John Murray.
Futuyma, D. (2010). Evolutionary constraint and ecological consequences. Evolution, 64(7), 1865–1884.
Gomulkiewicz, R., & Holt, R. (1995). When does evolution by natural selection prevent extinction? Evolution, 49, 201–207.
Gomulkiewicz, R., & Houle, D. (2009). Demographic and genetic constraints on evolution. The American Naturalist, 174, E218–E229.
Hallgrimson, B., Jamniczky, H., Young, N., Rolian, C., Parsons, T., Boughner, J., et al. (2009). Deciphering the palimpsest: Studying the relationship between morphological integration and phenotypic covariation. Evolutionary Biology, 36, 355–376.
Hansen, T. (2003). Is modularity necessary for evolvability? Remarks on the relationship between pleiotropy and evolvability. Biosystems, 69, 83–94.
Hansen, T., & Houle, D. (2008). Measuring and comparing evolvability and constraint in multivariate characters. Evolutionary Biology, 21, 1201–1219.
Huey, R., & Hertz, P. (1984). Is a jack-of-all-temperatures a master of none? Evolution, 38, 441–444.
Jones, A., Arnold, S., & Bürger, R. (2004). Evolution and stability of the G-Matrix on a landscape with a moving optimum. Evolution, 58, 1639–1654.
Jones, A., Arnold, S., & Bürger, R. (2007). The mutation matrix and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution, 61, 727–745.
Kellermann, V., van Heerwaarden, B., Sgrò, C., & Hoffmann, A. (2009). Fundamental evolutionary limits in ecological traits drive Drosophila species distributions. Science, 325, 1244–1246.
Klingenberg, C. (2004). Integration, modules, and development: Molecules to morphology to evolution. In M. Pigliucci & K. Preston (Eds.), Phenotypic integration: Studying the ecology and evolution of complex phenotypes (pp. 213–230). New York: Oxford University Press.
Lande, R. (1979). Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolution, applied to brain: Body-size allometry. Evolution, 33, 402–416.
Lande, R., & Shannon, S. (1996). The role of genetic variation in adaptation and population persistence in a changing environment. Evolution, 50, 434–437.
Marroig, G., & Cheverud, J. (2005). Size as a line of least evolutionary resistance: Diet and adaptive morphological variation in New World monkeys. Evolution, 59, 1128–1142.
Marroig, G., & Cheverud, J. (2010). Size as a line of least resistance II: Direct selection on size or correlated response due to constraints? Evolution, 64, 1470–1488.
Maynard Smith, J. (1976). What determines the rate of evolution? The American Naturalist, 110, 331–338.
Maynard Smith, J., Burian, R., Kauffman, S., Alberch, P., Campbell, J., Goodwin, B., et al. (1985). Developmental constraints and evolution: A perspective from the Mountain Lake conference on development and evolution. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 60, 265–287.
Mezey, J. G., & Houle, D. (2005). The dimensionality of genetic variation for wing shape in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution, 59, 1027–1038.
Orr, H., & Unkless, R. (2008). Population extinction and the genetics of adaptation. The American Naturalist, 172, 160–169.
Pachut, J. (1992). Morphological integration and covariance during astogeny of an ordovician trepostome bryozoan from communities of different diversities. Journal of Paleontology, 66, 750–757.
Pavlicev, M. (2009). Measuring morphological integration using eigenvalue variance. Evolutionary Biology, 36, 157–170.
Pavlicev, M., Cheverud, J., & Wagner, G. (2010). Evolution of adaptive phenotypic variation patterns by direct selection for evolvability. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.2113.
Pigliucci, M. (2008). Is evolvability evolvable? Nature Reviews Genetics, 9, 75–82.
Rice, S. (1998). The evolution of canalization and the breaking of von Baer’s law: Modeling the evolution of development with epistasis. Evolution, 52, 647–656.
Riedl, R. (1978). Order in living organisms: A systems analysis of evolution. New York: Wiley.
Rolian, C. (2009). Integration and evolveability in primate hands and feet. Evolutionary Biology, 36, 100–117.
Schluter, D. (1996). Adaptive radiation along genetic lines of least resistance. Evolution, 50, 1766–1774.
Schmidt, M., & Fischer, M. (2009). Morphological integration in mammalian limb proportions: Dissociation between function and development. Evolution, 63(3), 749–766.
Shubin, N., & Wake, D. (1996). Phylogeny, variation, and morphological integration. American Zoologist, 36, 51–60.
Simpson, G. (1953). The meaning of evolution. New Haven: Yale University.
Villmoare, B., Fish, J., & Jungers, W. (2011). Selection, integration, and strepsirrhine locomotor adaptations. Evolutionary Biology, 38, 88–99.
Wagner, G. (1988). The influence of variation and of developmental constraints on the rate of multivariate phenotypic evolution. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 1, 45–66.
Wagner, G. (1996). Homologues, natural kinds and the evolution of modularity. American Zoologist, 36, 36–43.
Wagner, G., & Alternberg, L. (1996). Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution, 50, 967–976.
Watkins, T. (2001). A quantitative genetic test of adaptive decoupling across metamorphosis for locomotor and life-history traits in the pacific tree frog, Hyla regilla. Evolution, 55, 1668–1677.
Wright, S. (1932). The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding, and selection in evolution. In Proceedings of the sixth international congress on genetics (pp. 355–366). Reprinted in William B. Provine (1986), Sewall wright: evolution: selected papers (pp. 161–177). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wright, S. (1949). Population structure in evolution. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 93, 471–478.
Wroe, S., & Milne, N. (2007). Convergence and remarkably consistent constraint in the evolution of carnivore skull shape. Evolution, 65, 1251–1260.
Young, N., & Hallgrimsson, B. (2005). Serial homology and the evolution of mammalian limb covariation structure. Evolution, 59(12), 269.
Young, N., Wagner, G., & Hallgrimson, B. (2010). Development and the evolvability of human limbs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 3400–3405.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Villmoare, B. Morphological Integration, Evolutionary Constraints, and Extinction: A Computer Simulation-Based Study. Evol Biol 40, 76–83 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-012-9186-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-012-9186-3