Cargando…

The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution

1. Natural selection can only occur if individuals differ in fitness. For this reason, the variance in relative fitness has been equated with the ‘opportunity for selection’ ([Formula: see text]), which has a long, albeit somewhat controversial, history. In this paper we discuss the use/misuse of [F...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reed, Thomas E., Visser, Marcel E., Waples, Robin S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10098507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36366942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13841
_version_ 1785024826195312640
author Reed, Thomas E.
Visser, Marcel E.
Waples, Robin S.
author_facet Reed, Thomas E.
Visser, Marcel E.
Waples, Robin S.
author_sort Reed, Thomas E.
collection PubMed
description 1. Natural selection can only occur if individuals differ in fitness. For this reason, the variance in relative fitness has been equated with the ‘opportunity for selection’ ([Formula: see text]), which has a long, albeit somewhat controversial, history. In this paper we discuss the use/misuse of [Formula: see text] and related metrics in evolutionary ecology. 2. The opportunity is only realised if some fraction of [Formula: see text] is caused by trait variation. Thus, [Formula: see text] does not imply that selection is occurring, as sometimes erroneously assumed, because all fitness variation could be independent of phenotype. 3. The selection intensity on any given trait cannot exceed [Formula: see text] , but this upper limit will never be reached because (a) stochastic factors always affect fitness, and (b) there might be multiple traits under selection. 4. The expected magnitude of the stochastic component of [Formula: see text] is negatively correlated with mean fitness. Uncertainty in realised [Formula: see text] is also larger when mean fitness or population/sample size are low. Variation in [Formula: see text] across time or space thus can be dominated (or solely driven) by variation in the strength of demographic stochasticity. 5. We illustrate these points using simulations and empirical data from a population study on great tits Parus major. Our analysis shows that the scope for fecundity selection in the great tits is substantially higher when using annual number of recruits as the fitness measure, rather than fledglings or eggs, even after adjusting for the dependence of [Formula: see text] on mean fitness. This suggests nonrandom survival of juveniles across families between life stages. Indeed, previous work on this population has shown that offspring recruitment is often nonrandom with respect to clutch size and laying date of parents, for example. 6. We conclude that one cannot make direct inferences about selection based on fitness data alone. However, examining variation in [Formula: see text] (the opportunity for fecundity selection adjusted for mean fitness) across life stages, years or environments can offer clues as to when/where fecundity selection might be strongest, which can be useful for research planning and experimental design.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10098507
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100985072023-04-14 The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution Reed, Thomas E. Visser, Marcel E. Waples, Robin S. J Anim Ecol Concept 1. Natural selection can only occur if individuals differ in fitness. For this reason, the variance in relative fitness has been equated with the ‘opportunity for selection’ ([Formula: see text]), which has a long, albeit somewhat controversial, history. In this paper we discuss the use/misuse of [Formula: see text] and related metrics in evolutionary ecology. 2. The opportunity is only realised if some fraction of [Formula: see text] is caused by trait variation. Thus, [Formula: see text] does not imply that selection is occurring, as sometimes erroneously assumed, because all fitness variation could be independent of phenotype. 3. The selection intensity on any given trait cannot exceed [Formula: see text] , but this upper limit will never be reached because (a) stochastic factors always affect fitness, and (b) there might be multiple traits under selection. 4. The expected magnitude of the stochastic component of [Formula: see text] is negatively correlated with mean fitness. Uncertainty in realised [Formula: see text] is also larger when mean fitness or population/sample size are low. Variation in [Formula: see text] across time or space thus can be dominated (or solely driven) by variation in the strength of demographic stochasticity. 5. We illustrate these points using simulations and empirical data from a population study on great tits Parus major. Our analysis shows that the scope for fecundity selection in the great tits is substantially higher when using annual number of recruits as the fitness measure, rather than fledglings or eggs, even after adjusting for the dependence of [Formula: see text] on mean fitness. This suggests nonrandom survival of juveniles across families between life stages. Indeed, previous work on this population has shown that offspring recruitment is often nonrandom with respect to clutch size and laying date of parents, for example. 6. We conclude that one cannot make direct inferences about selection based on fitness data alone. However, examining variation in [Formula: see text] (the opportunity for fecundity selection adjusted for mean fitness) across life stages, years or environments can offer clues as to when/where fecundity selection might be strongest, which can be useful for research planning and experimental design. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-11-15 2023-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10098507/ /pubmed/36366942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13841 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Concept
Reed, Thomas E.
Visser, Marcel E.
Waples, Robin S.
The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution
title The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution
title_full The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution
title_fullStr The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution
title_full_unstemmed The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution
title_short The opportunity for selection: A slippery concept in ecology and evolution
title_sort opportunity for selection: a slippery concept in ecology and evolution
topic Concept
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10098507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36366942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13841
work_keys_str_mv AT reedthomase theopportunityforselectionaslipperyconceptinecologyandevolution
AT vissermarcele theopportunityforselectionaslipperyconceptinecologyandevolution
AT waplesrobins theopportunityforselectionaslipperyconceptinecologyandevolution
AT reedthomase opportunityforselectionaslipperyconceptinecologyandevolution
AT vissermarcele opportunityforselectionaslipperyconceptinecologyandevolution
AT waplesrobins opportunityforselectionaslipperyconceptinecologyandevolution