Abstract

Adaptive phenotypic plasticity and fixed genotypic differences have long been considered opposing strategies in adaptation. More recently, these mechanisms have been proposed to act complementarily and under certain conditions jointly facilitate evolution, speciation, and even adaptive radiations. Here, we investigate the relative contributions of adaptive phenotypic plasticity vs. local adaptation to fitness, using an emerging model system to study early phases of adaptive divergence, the generalist cichlid fish species Astatotilapia burtoni. We tested direct fitness consequences of morphological divergence between lake and river populations in nature by performing two transplant experiments in Lake Tanganyika. In the first experiment, we used wild‐caught juvenile lake and river individuals, while in the second experiment, we used F1 crosses between lake and river fish bred in a common garden setup. By tracking the survival and growth of translocated individuals in enclosures in the lake over several weeks, we revealed local adaptation evidenced by faster growth of the wild‐caught resident population in the first experiment. On the other hand, we did not find difference in growth between different types of F1 crosses in the second experiment, suggesting a substantial contribution of adaptive phenotypic plasticity to increased immigrant fitness. Our findings highlight the value of formally comparing fitness of wild‐caught and common garden‐reared individuals and emphasize the necessity of considering adaptive phenotypic plasticity in the study of adaptive divergence.

Highlights

  • Fixed genotypic differences and phenotypic plasticity, that is, the ability of a single genotype to produce different phenotypes depending on the respective environment, have often been viewed as opposing strategies by which organisms can adapt to different environments (Schlichting & Pigliucci, 1998; Kawecki & Ebert, 2004)

  • Theory predicts that if there are no fitness costs associated with plasticity, a close match between the “plastic” phenotype and the fitness optimum would lead to stabilizing selection, so that genetic differentiation is unlikely to build up between populations

  • We provide the first demonstration of adaptive divergence between lake and river populations of a cichlid species at the level of whole-­organism performance, evidenced by higher growth rates in the wild-­caught resident population compared to nonresident fish in the first experiment

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Fixed genotypic differences and phenotypic plasticity, that is, the ability of a single genotype to produce different phenotypes depending on the respective environment, have often been viewed as opposing strategies by which organisms can adapt to different environments (Schlichting & Pigliucci, 1998; Kawecki & Ebert, 2004). Adaptive phenotypic plasticity—the generation of a phenotype that is better suited for a novel environment (Ghalambor, McKay, Carroll, & Reznick, 2007)—can promote the expansion of populations into new niches (Yeh & Price, 2004; Richards, Bossdorf, Muth, Gurevitch, & Pigliucci, 2006; Thibert-­Plante & Hendry, 2011). This is because adaptive phenotypic plasticity can temporarily protect genetic diversity from the direct impact of natural selection, thereby saving time for beneficial mutations to arise and to spread within a population, which may eventually result in genetic differentiation (Schlichting, 2004). Any incomplete response relative to a new fitness optimum would lead to directional selection with respect to extreme phenotypes (Price et al, 2003; Ghalambor et al, 2007)

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call