Evolutionary origins of invasive populations

Lee, Carol Eunmi; Gelembiuk, Gregory William

doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2008.00039.x

Cited by 210 publications

(266 citation statements)

References 254 publications

(470 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

254

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And so a population could quickly adapt at the target locus, while being freed of any cost of plasticity. Thus, our model is in accordance with rapidly adapting invasives originating from perturbed habitats (Ricciardi and MacIsaac 2000;Lee and Gelembiuk 2008).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Phenotypic Plasticity Promotes Balanced Polymorphism in Periodic Environments by a Genomic Storage Effect

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phenotypic plasticity is known to evolve in perturbed habitats, where it alleviates the deleterious effects of selection. But the effects of plasticity on levels of genetic polymorphism, an important precursor to adaptation in temporally varying environments, are unclear. Here we develop a haploid, two-locus population-genetic model to describe the interplay between a plasticity modifier locus and a target locus subject to periodically varying selection. We find that the interplay between these two loci can produce a "genomic storage effect" that promotes balanced polymorphism over a large range of parameters, in the absence of all other conditions known to maintain genetic variation. The genomic storage effect arises as recombination allows alleles at the two loci to escape more harmful genetic backgrounds and associate in haplotypes that persist until environmental conditions change. Using both Monte Carlo simulations and analytical approximations we quantify the strength of the genomic storage effect across a range of selection pressures, recombination rates, plasticity modifier effect sizes, and environmental periods.KEYWORDS balanced polymorphism; phenotypic plasticity; temporally varying selection; storage effect B ALANCED polymorphism fosters adaptation in changing environments. As populations continuously adapt from one environment to the other, genetic polymorphism provides a readily available reservoir of adaptive alleles that selection can act upon and, thus, promotes population persistence (Lande and Shannon 1996;Barrett and Schluter 2008). Despite their role in persistence, evolutionary mechanisms that help maintain genetic polymorphism in temporally changing environments remain poorly understood.Empirical studies have revealed cases of polymorphism that are subject to temporally varying selection (e.g., Lynch 1987;Cain et al. 1990;Turelli et al. 2001;Bergland et al. 2014). However, the underlying mechanisms maintaining genetic polymorphism in these cases are unclear. Theoretical possibilities that predict balanced polymorphism in varying environments include heterozygous advantage [geometric mean overdominance, which cannot occur in haploids (Dempster 1955;Haldane and Jayakar 1963;Gillespie 1973Gillespie , 1974], overlapping generations with age-/stage-specific selection or seed banks (Ellner and Hairston 1994;Turelli et al. 2001;Svardal et al. 2011), density regulation with resource competition (Dean 2005;Yi and Dean 2013), or these mechanisms in combination with spatial heterogeneity in selection (Gillespie 1974(Gillespie , 1975Ewing 1979;Gulisija and Kim 2015;Svardal et al. 2015). Despite these developments, balancing selection due to temporally varying selection has not been widely accepted in population genetic literature probably because early models were criticized due to their failure to maintain polymorphism under genetic drift (Hedrick 1976).The storage effect, initially recognized in studies of species coexistence in community ecology (Chesson and Warner 1981;Chesson 1985Chesso...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Phenotypic Plasticity Promotes Balanced Polymorphism in Periodic Environments by a Genomic Storage Effect

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, some species may be good invaders, because they have co-evolved with increasing human disturbances [4] or fluctuating environments [5] in their native ranges. However, a meta-analysis of 1813 species did not find evidence that invasive and threatened species possess contrasting traits [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasions and extinctions through the looking glass of evolutionary ecology

Colautti

Alexander

Dlugosch

et al. 2017

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

116

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One contribution of 18 to a theme issue 'Human influences on evolution, and the ecological and societal consequences'. Invasive and endangered species reflect opposite ends of a spectrum of ecological success, yet they experience many similar eco-evolutionary challenges including demographic bottlenecks, hybridization and novel environments. Despite these similarities, important differences exist. Demographic bottlenecks are more transient in invasive species, which (i) maintains ecologically relevant genetic variation, (ii) reduces mutation load, and (iii) increases the efficiency of natural selection relative to genetic drift. Endangered species are less likely to benefit from admixture, which offsets mutation load but also reduces fitness when populations are locally adapted. Invading species generally experience more benign environments with fewer natural enemies, which increases fitness directly and also indirectly by masking inbreeding depression. Adaptive phenotypic plasticity can maintain fitness in novel environments but is more likely to evolve in invasive species encountering variable habitats and to be compromised by demographic factors in endangered species. Placed in an eco-evolutionary context, these differences affect the breadth of the ecological niche, which arises as an emergent property of antagonistic selection and genetic constraints. Comparative studies of invasions and extinctions that apply an eco-evolutionary perspective could provide new insights into the environmental and genetic basis of ecological success in novel environments and improve efforts to preserve global biodiversity.This article is part of the themed issue 'Human influences on evolution, and the ecological and societal consequences'.

show abstract

“…More importantly, it also suggests that some (cryptic) fungal species are better adapted to colonization of disturbed environments than others. As with other organisms, this might also make them better invaders (Desprez-Loustau et al, 2007;Lee and Gelembiuk, 2008) and more important pathogens on a variety of hosts over larger areas . A more complete understanding of such phenomena would inform quarantine and management options for phytopathogenic fungi.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Organisms with broad niche breadths are often prominent colonizers of disturbed environments in their home range but invaders in new regions (Lee and Gelembiuk, 2008). This is also true for some invading fungi (Fisher et al, 2012;Santini et al, 2013), although the phenomenon has not been widely studied in this group of organisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%