Abstract

Cope's rule, wherein a lineage increases in body size through time, was originally motivated by macroevolutionary patterns observed in the fossil record. More recently, some authors have argued that evidence exists for generally positive selection on individual body size in contemporary populations, providing a microevolutionary mechanism for Cope's rule. If larger body size confers individual fitness advantages as the selection estimates suggest, thereby explaining Cope's rule, then body size should increase over microevolutionary time scales. We test this corollary by assembling a large database of studies reporting changes in phenotypic body size through time in contemporary populations, as well as studies reporting average breeding values for body size through time. Trends in body size were quite variable with an absence of any general trend, and many populations trended toward smaller body sizes. Although selection estimates can be interpreted to support Cope's rule, our results suggest that actual rates of phenotypic change for body size cannot. We discuss potential reasons for this discrepancy and its implications for the understanding of Cope's rule.

Highlights

  • Body size influences most aspects of an organism’s biology, including its physiology, morphology, life history, and biochemistry (Peters 1983; Calder 1984; Bonner 1988; LaBarbera1989; Purvis and Orme 2005; Kingsolver and Huey 2008)

  • Is genetically-based body size increasing? For this analysis, we focused on body size time series that presented mean breeding values, which are the additive effect of a genotype on a given trait (Lynch and Walsh 1998; Wilson et al 2010)

  • Is body size generally increasing within populations? Overall, body size changes through time were more often negative than positive and this was significant for Darwins

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Body size influences most aspects of an organism’s biology, including its physiology, morphology, life history, and biochemistry (Peters 1983; Calder 1984; Bonner 1988; LaBarbera1989; Purvis and Orme 2005; Kingsolver and Huey 2008). Physiological and locomotory), social dominance, tolerance to stress, predator avoidance, foraging ability, fecundity, and mating success (Peters 1983; Brown and Maurer 1986; Blanckenhorn 2000; Hone and Benton 2005; Bonner 2006; Kingsolver and Huey 2008; Herczeg et al 2010) Such selection is predicted to cause the evolution of increasing body size through time (Brown and Maurer 1986; Bonner 1988). Our analyses were based on phenotypes, and so might not reflect genetic change

Objectives
Methods
Results
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