Abstract
Fluctuating environmental conditions are ubiquitous in natural systems, and populations have evolved various strategies to cope with such fluctuations. The particular mechanisms that evolve profoundly influence subsequent evolutionary dynamics. One such mechanism is phenotypic plasticity, which is the ability of a single genotype to produce alternate phenotypes in an environmentally dependent context. Here, we use digital organisms (self-replicating computer programs) to investigate how adaptive phenotypic plasticity alters evolutionary dynamics and influences evolutionary outcomes in cyclically changing environments. Specifically, we examined the evolutionary histories of both plastic populations and non-plastic populations to ask: (1) Does adaptive plasticity promote or constrain evolutionary change? (2) Are plastic populations better able to evolve and then maintain novel traits? And (3), how does adaptive plasticity affect the potential for maladaptive alleles to accumulate in evolving genomes? We find that populations with adaptive phenotypic plasticity undergo less evolutionary change than non-plastic populations, which must rely on genetic variation from de novo mutations to continuously readapt to environmental fluctuations. Indeed, the non-plastic populations undergo more frequent selective sweeps and accumulate many more genetic changes. We find that the repeated selective sweeps in non-plastic populations drive the loss of beneficial traits and accumulation of maladaptive alleles, whereas phenotypic plasticity can stabilize populations against environmental fluctuations. This stabilization allows plastic populations to more easily retain novel adaptive traits than their non-plastic counterparts. In general, the evolution of adaptive phenotypic plasticity shifted evolutionary dynamics to be more similar to that of populations evolving in a static environment than to non-plastic populations evolving in an identical fluctuating environment. All natural environments subject populations to some form of change; our findings suggest that the stabilizing effect of phenotypic plasticity plays an important role in subsequent adaptive evolution.
Highlights
Natural organisms employ a wide range of evolved strategies for coping with environmental change, such as periodic migration (Winger et al, 2019), bet-hedging (Beaumont et al, 2009), adaptive tracking (Barrett and Schluter, 2008), and phenotypic plasticity (Ghalambor et al, 2007)
The evolution of adaptive phenotypic plasticity shifted evolutionary dynamics to be more similar to that of populations evolving in a static environment than to non-plastic populations evolving in an identical fluctuating environment
In experimental phase 2A, we tested whether adaptive phenotypic plasticity constrained or promoted subsequent evolutionary change in a fluctuating environment
Summary
Natural organisms employ a wide range of evolved strategies for coping with environmental change, such as periodic migration (Winger et al, 2019), bet-hedging (Beaumont et al, 2009), adaptive tracking (Barrett and Schluter, 2008), and phenotypic plasticity (Ghalambor et al, 2007). The particular mechanisms that evolve in response to fluctuating environments will shift the course of subsequent evolution (Wennersten and Forsman, 2012; Schaum and Collins, 2014). If we are to understand or predict evolutionary outcomes, we must be able to identify which mechanisms are most likely to evolve and what constraints and opportunities they impart on subsequent evolution. We focus on phenotypic plasticity, which can be defined as the capacity for a single genotype to alter phenotypic expression in response to a change in its environment (WestEberhard, 2003). Phenotypic plasticity is controlled by genes whose expression is coupled to one or more environmental signals, which may be either biotic or abiotic. The sex ratio of the crustacean Gammarus duebeni is modulated by changes in photoperiod and temperature (Dunn et al, 2005), and the reproductive output of some invertebrate species is heightened when infected with parasites to compensate for offspring loss (Chadwick and Little, 2005)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
