Variation in the relative magnitude of intraspecific and interspecific competitive effects in novel versus familiar environments in two Drosophila species

Models of competitor coevolution, especially the genetic feedback hypothesis, suggest that a negative correlation between intraspecific and interspecific competitive effects may be important in sustaining competitor coexistence, and can give rise to oscillatory dynamics with repeated reversals of competitive superiority. I reanalyzed previously published census data from an experiment in which populations of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans underwent competitive coevolution in one familiar and two novel environments, to specifically look for any evidence of a negative relationship between intraspecific and interspecific competitive effects on population growth rates, and for any indication of short period cycling in the relative magnitude of intraspecific and interspecific competitive effects. While there was considerable variation in the relative magnitude of intraspecific and interspecific competitive effects over generations, among both populations and environments, there was no clear evidence supporting the genetic feedback hypothesis. Intraspecific and interspecific competitive effects on population growth rates were strongly positively correlated in novel environments, and uncorrelated in the familiar environment. Data from the familiar environment indicated that indices of competition of populations of the initially superior competitor,D. melanogaster, might be showing some cyclic behaviour, but I argue that this is likely to be transient, and not suggestive of sustained oscillatory dynamics predicted by the genetic feedback model. I discuss the results in the context of the importance of the genetic architecture of intraspecific and interspecific competitive abilities in determining the coevolutionary trajectory of competitive interactions

Inbreeding and sex: canalization, plasticity and sexual selection

This article does not have an abstract

Are bigger flies always better: the role of genes and environment

This article does not have an abstract

Response to comment on "Stability via asynchrony in Drosophila metapopulations with low migration rates"

Ranta and Kaitala find asynchrony in our experiment unexpected and suggest stochasticity as a possible causal mechanism using simulated two-patch metapopulations. However, their mechanism can yield either subpopulation synchrony or asynchrony. We extend their approach to a nine-patch system approximating our experiment and show that asynchrony is not only not unexpected but extremely likely in real metapopulations with low migration

Local Perturbations Do Not Affect Stability of Laboratory Fruitfly Metapopulations

A large number of theoretical studies predict that the dynamics of spatially structured populations (metapopulations) can be altered by constant perturbations to local population size. However, these studies presume large metapopulations inhabiting noise-free, zero-extinction environments, and their predictions have never been empirically verified. Here we report an empirical study on the effects of localized perturbations on global dynamics and stability, using fruitfly metapopulations in the laboratory. We find that constant addition of individuals to a particular subpopulation in every generation stabilizes that subpopulation locally, but does not have any detectable effect on the dynamics and stability of the metapopulation. Simulations of our experimental system using a simple but widely applicable model of population dynamics were able to recover the empirical findings, indicating the generality of our results. We then simulated the possible consequences of perturbing more subpopulations, increasing the strength of perturbations, and varying the rate of migration, but found that none of these conditions were expected to alter the outcomes of our experiments. Finally, we show that our main results are robust to the presence of local extinctions in the metapopulation. Our study shows that localized perturbations are unlikely to affect the dynamics of real metapopulations, a finding that has cautionary implications for ecologists and conservation biologists faced with the problem of stabilizing unstable metapopulations in nature.Comment: 9 pages, 11 figure

Stability via asynchrony in Drosophila metapopulations with low migration rates

Very few experimental studies have examined how migration rate affects metapopulation dynamics and stability. We studied the dynamics of replicate laboratory metapopulations of Drosophila under different migration rates. Low migration stabilized metapopulation dynamics, while promoting unstable subpopulation dynamics, by inducing asynchrony among neighboring subpopulations. High migration synchronized subpopulation dynamics, thereby destabilizing the metapopulations. Contrary to some theoretical predictions, increased migration did not affect average population size. Simulations based on a simple non-species-specific population growth model captured most features of the data, which suggests that our results are generalizable

What have two decades of laboratory life-history evolution studies on Drosophila melanogaster taught us?

A series of laboratory selection experiments on Drosophila melanogaster over the past two decades has provided insights into the specifics of life-history tradeoffs in the species and greatly refined our understanding of how ecology and genetics interact in life-history evolution. Much of what has been learnt from these studies about the subtlety of the microevolutionary process also has significant implications for experimental design and inference in organismal biology beyond life-history evolution, as well as for studies of evolution in the wild. Here we review work on the ecology and evolution of life-histories in laboratory populations of D. melanogaster, emphasizing how environmental effects on life-history-related traits can influence evolutionary change. We discuss life-history tradeoffs-many unexpected-revealed by selection experiments, and also highlight recent work that underscores the importance to life-history evolution of cross-generation and cross-life-stage effects and interactions, sexual antagonism and sexual dimorphism, population dynamics, and the possible role of biological clocks in timing life-history events. Finally, we discuss some of the limitations of typical selection experiments, and how these limitations might be transcended in the future by a combination of more elaborate and realistic selection experiments, developmental evolutionary biology, and the emerging discipline of phenomics