Jump to content

Local adaptation: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m clarified phrasing
Xanthopan (talk | contribs)
80 edits
added figure, added citations, added some text and headings
Line 1: Line 1:
{{context|date=November 2014}}
{{context|date=November 2014}}
Local adaptation is when a [[population]] of organisms has evolved to be more well-suited to its environment than other members of the same species. This occurs due to differential pressures of [[natural selection]] on populations from different environments. For example, populations of a species that lives within a wide range of temperatures may be locally adapted to the warmer or cooler climate where they live. More formally, a population is said to be locally adapted<ref>{{cite book|last1=Williams|first1=George|title=Adaptation and Natural Selection|url=https://archive.org/details/adaptationnatura00will|url-access=registration|date=1966|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton}}</ref> if organisms in that population have evolved different phenotypes than other populations in response to selective pressures imposed by some aspect of their local environment.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leimu|first1=Roosa|title=A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants|journal=PLoS ONE|date=December 23, 2008|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|pmid=19104660|pmc=2602971|volume=3|issue=12|page=e4010}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Kawecki|first=Tadeusz J.|last2=Ebert|first2=Dieter|date=2004-12-01|title=Conceptual issues in local adaptation|journal=Ecology Letters|language=en|volume=7|issue=12|pages=1225–1241|doi=10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x|issn=1461-0248|url=http://doc.rero.ch/record/4112/files/1_ebert_cil.pdf}}</ref> Local adaptation is often determined via reciprocal transplant experiments, where organisms from one population are transplanted into another population, and vice versa, and their fitnesses measured.<ref name=":0" /> If the foreign (transplanted) organisms have lower fitness than the native organisms in an environment, then the native population can be said to be locally adapted.
Local adaptation is when a [[population]] of organisms evolves (adapts) to be more well-suited to its local environment than other members of the same species. Local adaptation requires that different populations of the same species experience different [[natural selection]], due to differences in the abiotic or biotic environment the populations occupy. For example, if a species lives across a wide range of temperatures, populations from warm areas may have better heat tolerance than populations of the same species that live in the cold part of its geographic range. More formally, a population is said to be locally adapted<ref>{{cite book|last1=Williams|first1=George|title=Adaptation and Natural Selection|url=https://archive.org/details/adaptationnatura00will|url-access=registration|date=1966|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton}}</ref> if organisms in that population have evolved different phenotypes than other populations of the same species, and local phenotypes have higher fitness in their home environment compared to individuals that originate from other locations in the species range <ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leimu|first1=Roosa|title=A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants|journal=PLoS ONE|date=December 23, 2008|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|pmid=19104660|pmc=2602971|volume=3|issue=12|page=e4010}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Kawecki|first=Tadeusz J.|last2=Ebert|first2=Dieter|date=2004-12-01|title=Conceptual issues in local adaptation|journal=Ecology Letters|language=en|volume=7|issue=12|pages=1225–1241|doi=10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x|issn=1461-0248|url=http://doc.rero.ch/record/4112/files/1_ebert_cil.pdf}}</ref>.


== Testing for local adaptation ==
⚫
Populations located in different environments may be faced with different [[Biotic stress|biotic]] and [[Abiotic stress|abiotic]] pressures,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Thompson|first1=John|title=The geographic mosaic of coevolution|date=2005|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|isbn=9780226797625}}</ref> consequently natural selection may drive the evolution of these populations in different directions. This divergent natural selection can lead to differences in trait values among populations for those traits that are heritable and impact organism fitness.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Endler|first1=John|title=Natural selection in the wild|date=1986|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton|isbn=978-0691083872}}</ref> Local adaptation of a variety of traits has been demonstrated in numerous, phylogenetically disparate organisms.
Local adaptation is often determined via [[Transplant experiment|reciprocal transplant experiments]], where organisms from one population are transplanted into another population, and vice versa, and their fitness is measured.<ref name=":0" /> If the local transplants outperform (i.e. have higher fitness than) the foreign transplants, the local population is said to be locally adapted<ref name=":0" />. Before 2004, reciprocal transplants sometimes considered populations locally adapted if the population experienced its highest fitness in its home site vs the foreign site (i.e. compared the same population at multiple sites, vs. multiple populations at the same site). This definition of local adaptation has been largely abandoned after Kawecki and Ebert argued convincingly that populations could be adapted to poor-quality sites but still experience higher fitness if moved to a more benign site <ref name=":0" />.


Reciprocal transplants have most often been done with plants or other organisms that do not move <ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Hereford|first=Joe|date=2009|title=A Quantitative Survey of Local Adaptation and Fitness Trade‐Offs|url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/597611|journal=The American Naturalist|language=en|volume=173|issue=5|pages=579–588|doi=10.1086/597611|issn=0003-0147|via=}}</ref>.
⚫
Examples of local adaptation abound in the natural world. For instance, many plant populations exhibit local adaptation.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leimu|first1=Roosa|title=A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants|journal=PLoS ONE|date=December 23, 2008|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|pmid=19104660|pmc=2602971|volume=3|issue=12|page=e4010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Elizabeth|first1=Leger|title=Genetic variation and local adaptation at a cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) invasion edge in western Nevada|journal=Molecular Ecology|date=2009|volume=18|issue=21|pages=4366–4379|doi=10.1111/j.1365-294x.2009.04357.x|pmid=19769691}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Joshi|first1=J|title=Local adaptation enhances performance of common plant species|journal=Ecology Letters|date=2001|doi=10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00262.x|volume=4|issue=6|pages=536–544}}</ref> This has been established by reciprocally transplanting plants from one population into another population. The transplanted plants often do worse in the novel environment than the native plants that are locally adapted. Many examples of local adaptation exist in host-parasite systems as well. For instance, a host may be resistant to a locally-abundant pathogen or parasite, but conspecific hosts from elsewhere where that pathogen is not abundant may have no evolved no such adaptation. <ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kaltz|first1=O|last2=Shykoff|first2=JA|title=Local adaptation in host-parasite systems|journal=Heredity|date=1998|volume=81|issue=4|pages=361–370|doi= 10.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00435.x}}</ref>
[[File:Local adaptation.png|thumb|385x385px|Hypothetical results from two reciprocal transplant experiments, in which organisms from site1 and site2 are transplanted to both sites and their performance compared. In both experiments (panels), the local sources outcompete the foreign sources, indicating that populations are locally adapted. In the left panel each source also does best at its home site. In the right panel site1 is higher quality than site2, so both populations do best in site1, even though the population from site2 is locally adapted to its poor quality site.]]
<br />

== Frequency of local adaptation ==
Several meta-analyses have attempted to quantify how common local adaptation is, and generally reach similar conclusions. Local adaptation has been found in roughly 75% of reciprocal transplants using plants <ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Leimu|first=Roosa|last2=Fischer|first2=Markus|date=2008|editor-last=Buckling|editor-first=Angus|title=A Meta-Analysis of Local Adaptation in Plants|url=https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|journal=PLoS ONE|language=en|volume=3|issue=12|pages=e4010|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|issn=1932-6203|pmc=PMC2602971|pmid=19104660|via=}}</ref>.

== Drivers of local adaptation ==
⚫
Populations from different environments may be faced with different [[Biotic stress|biotic]] and [[Abiotic stress|abiotic]] pressures,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Thompson|first1=John|title=The geographic mosaic of coevolution|date=2005|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|isbn=9780226797625}}</ref> consequently natural selection may drive the evolution of these populations in different directions.

⚫
Examples of local adaptation abound in the natural world. For instance, many plant populations exhibit local adaptation.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leimu|first1=Roosa|title=A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants|journal=PLoS ONE|date=December 23, 2008|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|pmid=19104660|pmc=2602971|volume=3|issue=12|page=e4010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Elizabeth|first1=Leger|title=Genetic variation and local adaptation at a cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) invasion edge in western Nevada|journal=Molecular Ecology|date=2009|volume=18|issue=21|pages=4366–4379|doi=10.1111/j.1365-294x.2009.04357.x|pmid=19769691}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Joshi|first1=J|title=Local adaptation enhances performance of common plant species|journal=Ecology Letters|date=2001|doi=10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00262.x|volume=4|issue=6|pages=536–544}}</ref> Many examples of local adaptation exist in host-parasite systems as well. For instance, a host may be resistant to a locally-abundant pathogen or parasite, but conspecific hosts from elsewhere where that pathogen is not abundant may have no evolved no such adaptation. <ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kaltz|first1=O|last2=Shykoff|first2=JA|title=Local adaptation in host-parasite systems|journal=Heredity|date=1998|volume=81|issue=4|pages=361–370|doi= 10.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00435.x}}</ref>


== See also ==
== See also ==

Revision as of 22:42, 23 March 2020

Local adaptation is when a population of organisms evolves (adapts) to be more well-suited to its local environment than other members of the same species. Local adaptation requires that different populations of the same species experience different natural selection, due to differences in the abiotic or biotic environment the populations occupy. For example, if a species lives across a wide range of temperatures, populations from warm areas may have better heat tolerance than populations of the same species that live in the cold part of its geographic range. More formally, a population is said to be locally adapted[1] if organisms in that population have evolved different phenotypes than other populations of the same species, and local phenotypes have higher fitness in their home environment compared to individuals that originate from other locations in the species range [2][3].

Testing for local adaptation

Local adaptation is often determined via reciprocal transplant experiments, where organisms from one population are transplanted into another population, and vice versa, and their fitness is measured.[3] If the local transplants outperform (i.e. have higher fitness than) the foreign transplants, the local population is said to be locally adapted[3]. Before 2004, reciprocal transplants sometimes considered populations locally adapted if the population experienced its highest fitness in its home site vs the foreign site (i.e. compared the same population at multiple sites, vs. multiple populations at the same site). This definition of local adaptation has been largely abandoned after Kawecki and Ebert argued convincingly that populations could be adapted to poor-quality sites but still experience higher fitness if moved to a more benign site [3].

Reciprocal transplants have most often been done with plants or other organisms that do not move [4].

Hypothetical results from two reciprocal transplant experiments, in which organisms from site1 and site2 are transplanted to both sites and their performance compared. In both experiments (panels), the local sources outcompete the foreign sources, indicating that populations are locally adapted. In the left panel each source also does best at its home site. In the right panel site1 is higher quality than site2, so both populations do best in site1, even though the population from site2 is locally adapted to its poor quality site.


Frequency of local adaptation

Several meta-analyses have attempted to quantify how common local adaptation is, and generally reach similar conclusions. Local adaptation has been found in roughly 75% of reciprocal transplants using plants [4][5].

Drivers of local adaptation

Populations from different environments may be faced with different biotic and abiotic pressures,[6] consequently natural selection may drive the evolution of these populations in different directions.

Examples of local adaptation abound in the natural world. For instance, many plant populations exhibit local adaptation.[7][8][9] Many examples of local adaptation exist in host-parasite systems as well. For instance, a host may be resistant to a locally-abundant pathogen or parasite, but conspecific hosts from elsewhere where that pathogen is not abundant may have no evolved no such adaptation. [10]

See also

References

  1. ^ Williams, George (1966). Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  2. ^ Leimu, Roosa (December 23, 2008). "A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants". PLoS ONE. 3 (12): e4010. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004010. PMC 2602971. PMID 19104660.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  3. ^ a b c d Kawecki, Tadeusz J.; Ebert, Dieter (2004-12-01). "Conceptual issues in local adaptation" (PDF). Ecology Letters. 7 (12): 1225–1241. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x. ISSN 1461-0248.
  4. ^ a b Hereford, Joe (2009). "A Quantitative Survey of Local Adaptation and Fitness Trade‐Offs". The American Naturalist. 173 (5): 579–588. doi:10.1086/597611. ISSN 0003-0147.
  5. ^ Leimu, Roosa; Fischer, Markus (2008). Buckling, Angus (ed.). "A Meta-Analysis of Local Adaptation in Plants". PLoS ONE. 3 (12): e4010. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004010. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 2602971. PMID 19104660.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  6. ^ Thompson, John (2005). The geographic mosaic of coevolution. The University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226797625.
  7. ^ Leimu, Roosa (December 23, 2008). "A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants". PLoS ONE. 3 (12): e4010. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004010. PMC 2602971. PMID 19104660.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  8. ^ Elizabeth, Leger (2009). "Genetic variation and local adaptation at a cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) invasion edge in western Nevada". Molecular Ecology. 18 (21): 4366–4379. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2009.04357.x. PMID 19769691.
  9. ^ Joshi, J (2001). "Local adaptation enhances performance of common plant species". Ecology Letters. 4 (6): 536–544. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00262.x.
  10. ^ Kaltz, O; Shykoff, JA (1998). "Local adaptation in host-parasite systems". Heredity. 81 (4): 361–370. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00435.x.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Local_adaptation&oldid=947039171"