Meaningful evolutionary interpretations of life history patterns, including age and size at first reproduction, fecundity schedule, and adult and juvenile survival, require that a distinction be made between genotypic variation and environmentally induced phenotypic variation. This distinction must be made not only between populations or geographic localities but within populations (i.e., the heritability of life history traits). As pointed out in a recent review by Stearns (1977), an extraordinarily large number of studies only document variation in life history patterns both between and within species, but then comment on its adaptive significance. In contrast, few investigations have employed experimental techniques that unambiguously distinguish the genetic and environmental sources of variation and clarify their ecological and evolutionary implications (Clausen et al., 1940, 1948; Hickman, 1975; Berven et al., 1979; Ballinger, 1979; Stearns and Sage, 1980). Ignoring the variation induced by the environment may lead to spurious conclusions of adaptiveness. Environmental influences may mask the underlying genetic differences between populations, which, in some cases, may be counter to the observed phenotypic variation (Levins, 1969; Berven et al., 1979). Specific environmental differences may also have non-additive effects on different genotypes giving rise to significant genotype X environment interactions. Furthermore, plasticity in development, whereby individuals acquire morphological or life history traits that allow them to complete their life cycles in a wide range of biotic and abiotic conditions, may be an important adaptation in its own right (Bradshaw, 1965; Marshall and Jain, 1968). Such ambiguities underscore the importance of properly identifying the nature of the observed variation. The components of the life history of an organism are generally viewed as a collection of coadapted traits which have been molded by natural selection (see review by Stearns, 1976). In this sense, distinctions among populations in life history patterns are thought to be genetically based and to reflect distinctions among environments in ecologically important selective pressures. Larger body size, delayed reproduction and larger clutch and egg sizes, are characteristic of amphibian populations living at high elevations (Pettus and Angleton, 1967; Tilley, 1973; Licht, 1975). However, as ectotherms, amphibian growth and development are directly and strongly affected by such environmental factors as temperature (Smith-Gill and Berven, 1979) and density (Wilbur, 1976, 1977a, 1977b). Some of the clinal variation in life history characteristics may have a genetic basis, but few studies have experimentally established the proportion of the variation that is induced. The absence of such evidence does not justify the assumption that all geographic variation reflects genetic differences. For the past four years I have been studying the variation in life history traits of the wood frog, Rana sylvatica, along an altitudinal gradient from Maryland to western Virginia. Wood frogs are widely distributed in North America ranging from the southern Appalachians to within the Arctic Circle. Considerable variation in morphology (Martof and Humphries, 1959), reproductive characteristics (Herreid and Kinney, 1967; Meeks and Nagel, 1973) and developmental patterns (Her-
Read full abstract