Dietary restriction fails to extend life in stressful environments

Moderate dietary restriction often prolongs life in laboratory animals, and this response has been interpreted as an adaptive strategy that promotes survival during famine. However, dietary restriction can also increase frailty, and it therefore remains unclear whether restricted diets prolong life under stressful conditions like those experienced by wild animals. We manipulated adult dietary protein of Drosophila melanogaster across a gradient of ambient temperature, and examined effects on survival. To test for trade-offs, we also quantified reproduction, and performance of F1, F2 and F3 descendants. We found that protein restriction increased longevity of one or both sexes at benign ambient temperatures (25°C and 27°C), but failed to extend longevity of flies maintained in cold (21°C and 23°C) or hot (29°C) conditions. Instead, in females, protein restriction resulted in strongly elevated mortality at cold temperatures. Protein restriction also generally reduced reproductive performance, and did not consistently enhance performance of F1, F2 or F3 descendants. Taken together, our results challenge the long-held idea that extended longevity of diet-restricted laboratory animals represents an adaptive survival strategy in natural populations. Our findings suggest instead that this response is an artefact of benign laboratory conditions, and that DR-induced life extension might not be achieved in the more stressful conditions experienced in the wild

Evolution Under Dietary Restriction Decouples Survival From Fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster Females

One of the key tenets of life-history theory is that reproduction and survival are linked and that they trade-off with each other. When dietary resources are limited, reduced reproduction with a concomitant increase in survival is commonly observed. It is often hypothesised that this dietary restriction (DR) effect results from strategically reduced investment in reproduction in favour of somatic maintenance in order to survive starvation periods until resources become plentiful again. We used experimental evolution to test this “waiting-for-the-good-times” hypothesis, which predicts that selection under sustained DR will favour increased investment in reproduction at the cost of survival because “good times” never come. We assayed fecundity and survival of female Drosophila melanogaster fruit flies that had evolved for 50 generations on three different diets varying in protein content – low (classic DR diet), standard and high, in a full-factorial design. High-diet females evolved overall increased fecundity but showed reduced survival on low and standard diets. Low-diet females evolved reduced survival on low diet without corresponding increase in reproduction. In general, there was little correspondence between the evolution of survival and fecundity across all dietary regimes. Our results contradict the hypothesis that resource reallocation between fecundity and somatic maintenance underpins lifespan extension under DR

Sexual dimorphism in trait variability and its eco-evolutionary and statistical implications

Biomedical and clinical sciences are experiencing a renewed interest in the fact that males and females differ in many anatomic, physiological, and behavioural traits. Sex differences in trait variability, however, are yet to receive similar recognition. In medical science, mammalian females are assumed to have higher trait variability due to estrous cycles (the ‘estrus-mediated variability hypothesis’); historically in biomedical research, females have been excluded for this reason. Contrastingly, evolutionary theory and associated data support the ‘greater male variability hypothesis’. Here, we test these competing hypotheses in 218 traits measured in >26,900 mice, using meta-analysis methods. Neither hypothesis could universally explain patterns in trait variability. Sex bias in variability was trait-dependent. While greater male variability was found in morphological traits, females were much more variable in immunological traits. Sex-specific variability has eco-evolutionary ramifications, including sex-dependent responses to climate change, as well as statistical implications including power analysis considering sex difference in variance

Sex differences in allometry for phenotypic traits in mice indicate that females are not scaled males

Sex differences in the lifetime risk and expression of disease are well-known. Preclinical research targeted at improving treatment, increasing health span, and reducing the financial burden of health care, has mostly been conducted on male animals and cells. The extent to which sex differences in phenotypic traits are explained by sex differences in body weight remains unclear. We quantify sex differences in the allometric relationship between trait value and body weight for 363 phenotypic traits in male and female mice, recorded in >2 million measurements from the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium. We find sex differences in allometric parameters (slope, intercept, residual SD) are common (73% traits). Body weight differences do not explain all sex differences in trait values but scaling by weight may be useful for some traits. Our results show sex differences in phenotypic traits are trait-specific, promoting case-specific approaches to drug dosage scaled by body weight in mice

Sexual dimorphism in trait variability and its eco-evolutionary and statistical implications

Biomedical and clinical sciences are experiencing a renewed interest in the fact that males and females differ in many anatomic, physiological, and behavioral traits. Sex differences in trait variability, however, are yet to receive similar recognition. In medical science, mammalian females are assumed to have higher trait variability due to estrous cycles (the 'estrus-mediated variability hypothesis'); historically in biomedical research, females have been excluded for this reason. Contrastingly, evolutionary theory and associated data support the 'greater male variability hypothesis'. Here, we test these competing hypotheses in 218 traits measured in >26,900 mice, using meta-analysis methods. Neither hypothesis could universally explain patterns in trait variability. Sex-bias in variability was trait-dependent. While greater male variability was found in morphological traits, females were much more variable in immunological traits. Sex-specific variability has eco-evolutionary ramifications including sex-dependent responses to climate change, as well as statistical implications including power analysis considering sex difference in variance

Both Geography and Ecology Contribute to Mating Isolation in Guppies

Local adaptation to different environments can promote mating isolation – either as an incidental by-product of trait divergence, or as a result of selection to avoid maladaptive mating. Numerous recent empirical examples point to the common influence of divergent natural selection on speciation based largely on evidence of strong pre-mating isolation between populations from different habitat types. Accumulating evidence for natural selection's influence on speciation is therefore no longer a challenge. The difficulty, rather, is in determining the mechanisms involved in the progress of adaptive divergence to speciation once barriers to gene flow are already present. Here, we present results of both laboratory and field experiments with Trinidadian guppies (Poecilia reticulata) from different environments, who do not show complete reproductive isolation despite adaptive divergence. We investigate patterns of mating isolation between populations that do and do not exchange migrants and show evidence for both by-product and reinforcement mechanisms depending on female ecology. Specifically, low-predation females discriminate against all high-predation males thus implying a by-product mechanism, whereas high-predation females only discriminate against low-predation males from further upstream in the same river, implying selection to avoid maladaptive mating. Our study thus confirms that mechanisms of adaptive speciation are not necessarily mutually exclusive and uncovers the complex ecology-geography interactions that underlie the evolution of mating isolation in nature