Eco-evolution in size-structured ecosystems: simulation case study of rapid morphological changes in alewife

Abstract

BackgroundOver the last 300 years, interactions between alewives and zooplankton communities in several lakes in the U.S. have caused the alewives’ morphology to transition rapidly from anadromous to landlocked. Lakes with landlocked alewives contain smaller-bodied zooplankton than those without alewives. Landlocked adult alewives display smaller body sizes, narrower gapes, smaller inter-gill-raker spacings, reach maturity at an earlier age, and are less fecund than anadromous alewives. Additionally, landlocked alewives consume pelagic prey exclusively throughout their lives whereas anadromous alewives make an ontogenetic transition from pelagic to littoral prey. These rapid, well-documented changes in the alewives’ morphology provide important insights into the morphological evolution of fish.Predicting the morphological evolution of fish is crucial for fisheries and ecosystem management, but the involvement of multiple trophic interactions make predictions difficult. To obtain an improved understanding of rapid morphological change in fish, we developed an individual-based model that simulated rapid changes in the body size and gill-raker count of a fish species in a hypothetical, size-structured prey community. Model parameter values were based mainly on data from empirical studies on alewives. We adopted a functional trait approach; consequently, the model explicitly describes the relationships between prey body size, alewife body size, and alewife gill-raker count. We sought to answer two questions: (1) How does the impact of alewife populations on prey feed back to impact alewife size and gill raker number under several alternative scenarios? (2) Will the trajectory of the landlocked alewives’ morphological evolution change after 150–300 years in freshwater?ResultsOver the first 250 years, the alewives’ numbers of gill-rakers only increased when reductions in their body size substantially improved their ability to forage for small prey. Additionally, alewives’ gill-raker counts increased more rapidly as the adverse effects of narrow gill-raker spacings on foraging for large prey were made less severe. For the first 150–250 years, alewives’ growth decreased monotonically, and their gill-raker number increased monotonically. After the first 150–250 years, however, the alewives exhibited multiple evolutionary morphological trajectories in different trophic settings. In several of these settings, their evolutionary trajectories even reversed after the first 150–250 years.ConclusionsAlewives affected the abundance and morphology of their prey, which in turn changed the abundance and morphology of the alewives. Complex low-trophic-level interactions can alter the abundance and characteristics of alewives. This study suggests that the current morphology of recently (∼300 years)-landlocked alewives may not represent an evolutionarily stable state.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12862-017-0912-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Importance of interindividual interactions in eco‐evolutionary population dynamics: The rise of demo‐genetic agent‐based models

“…Trophic interactions may contribute to the resource context within which functional traits related to resource acquisition may evolve (Kang & Thibert-Plante, 2017). On a macroevolutionary timescale, intra-and inter-specific competition for resources can drive speciation (Gavrilets et al, 2007;Weber et al, 2017).…”

“…Most of the reviewed multispecies DG‐ABMs focussed on competitive interactions, in an explicit prey–predators' or community context. For instance, Kang and Thibert‐Plante (2017) illustrated that considering trophic interactions and the genetic basis of functional traits within a single model could improve the understanding of evolutionary morphological changes in fish. Hillaert et al (2020) showed that in a fragmented habitat, the presence of predators selects for increased herbivore movement and hence larger herbivore size.…”

“…Interspecific interactions may also shape the within‐population social context and contribute to evolution: for instance, the existence and strength of plant‐pollinator interactions define the social context within which selfing may evolve (Katsuhara et al, 2021 ). Trophic interactions may contribute to the resource context within which functional traits related to resource acquisition may evolve (Kang & Thibert‐Plante, 2017 ). On a macroevolutionary timescale, intra‐ and inter‐specific competition for resources can drive speciation (Gavrilets et al, 2007 ; Weber et al, 2017 ).…”

“…interspecific reproductive interference).Most of the reviewed multispecies DG-ABMs focussed on competitive interactions, in an explicit prey-predators' or community context. For instance,Kang and Thibert-Plante (2017) illustrated that considering trophic interactions and the genetic basis of functional…”

Genetic stock identification reveals greater use of an oceanic feeding ground around the Faroe Islands by multi-sea winter Atlantic salmon, with variation in use across reporting groups

“…Understanding patterns of resource use provides insight into the evolution and maintenance of the intraspecific phenotypic diversity observed within many aquatic taxa (Hawley et al, 2016;Kang and Thibert-Plante, 2017;Kane et al, 2022). Differential resource use can limit intraspecific competition across life stages as well as buffer against extinction risk by spatially segregating a population into different habitats (Schindler et al, 2015;Østbye et al, 2020).…”