Climatic and Temporal Effects on the Expression of Secondary Sexual Characters: Genetic and Environmental Components

Abstract

Abstract. Despite great interest in sexual selection, relatively little is known in detail about the genetic and environmental determinants of secondary sexual characters in natural populations. Such information is important for determining the way in which populations may respond to sexual selection. We report analyses of genetic and largescale environmental components of phenotypic variation of two secondary sexual plumage characters (forehead and wing patch size) in the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis over a 22-year period. We found significant heritability for both characters but little genetic covariance between the two. We found a positive association between forehead patch size and a large-scale climatic index, the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index, but not for wing patch. This pattern was observed in both cross-sectional and longitudinal data suggesting that the population response to NAO index can be explained as the result of phenotypic plasticity. Heritability of forehead patch size for old males, calculated under favorable conditions (NAO index Ն median), was greater than that under unfavorable conditions (NAO index Ͻ median). These changes occurred because there were opposing changes in additive genetic variance (V A ) and residual variance (V R ) under favorable and unfavorable conditions, with V A increasing and V R decreasing in good environments. However, no such effect was detected for young birds, or for wing patch size in either age class. In addition to these environmental effects on both phenotypic and genetic variances, we found evidence for a significant decrease of forehead patch size over time in older birds. This change appears to be caused by a change in the sign of viability selection on forehead patch size, which is associated with a decline in the breeding value of multiple breeders. Our data thus reveal complex patterns of environmental influence on the expression of secondary sexual characters, which may have important implications for understanding selection and evolution of these characters.

The Impact of Environmental Heterogeneity on Genetic Architecture in a Wild Population of Soay Sheep

“…The environment can have a direct influence on quantitative genetic parameters (Hoffmann and Parsons 1991;Hoffmann and Merilä 1999) and numerous studies have shown that the environment can directly influence the genetic determination of a suite of traits (Via and Lande 1985;Hoffmann and Merilä 1999;Charmantier and Garant 2005;Nussey et al 2007) and thus the genetic correlations between them under laboratory conditions (Simmons and Roff 1996;Norry and Loeschcke 2002;Cano et al 2004). In this study, additive genetic variance of both male body weight and parasite load increased with increasingly favorable environmental conditions, supporting previous studies of natural populations (Merilä 1997;Garant et al 2004;Charmantier and Garant 2005). These genotype-byenvironment interactions resulted in changing genetic correlations among male traits across environmental conditions, which also resulted in changing genetic correlations between the sexes.…”

Environmental quality and evolutionary potential: lessons from wild populations

“…The ranking of favourable versus unfavourable was provided by the authors, on the basis of either seasonal or annual climatic conditions (e.g. Garant et al 2004, poor conditions when NAO index !median), food abundance differences (e.g. De Neve et al 2004) or effects on fitness factors (e.g.…”

Swingin' in the rain: condition dependence and sexual selection in a capricious world

“…In addition, the signal can depend more on the early environmental conditions than the underlying genotype (Griffith et al 1999;Qvarnströ m 1999;Jensen et al 2006). However, examination of how the selective landscape might change during the lifetime of an individual in response to environmental change have thus far been confined to short-lived species (Griffith & Sheldon 2001;Kruuk et al 2001;Garant et al 2004). This is unfortunate as recent studies of sexual signalling have drawn attention to a much richer range of possibilities when life-history trade-offs affect the amount of signalling effort (Hunt et al 2004;Getty 2006).…”