COSTS AND LIMITS OF PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY IN ISLAND POPULATIONS OF THE COMMON FROG RANA TEMPORARIA UNDER DIVERGENT SELECTION PRESSURES

Costs and limits are assumed to be the major constraints on the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. However, despite their expected importance, they have been surprisingly hard to find in natural populations. It has therefore been argued that natural selection might have removed high-cost genotypes in all populations. However, if costs of plasticity are linked to the degree of plasticity expressed, then high costs of plasticity would only be present in populations where increased plasticity is under selection. We tested this hypothesis by investigating costs and limits of adaptive phenotypic plasticity in development time in a common garden study of island populations of the common frog Rana temporaria , which have varying levels of development time and phenotypic plasticity. Costs of plasticity were only found in populations with high-plastic genotypes, whereas the populations with the most canalized genotypes instead had a cost of canalization. Moreover, individuals displaying the most extreme phenotypes also were the most plastic ones, which mean we found no limits of plasticity. This suggests that costs of plasticity increase with increased level of plasticity in the populations, and therefore costs of plasticity might be more commonly found in high-plastic populations.     

Potential local adaptation in populations of invasive reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) across an urbanization gradient

Urban stressors represent strong selective gradients that can elicit evolutionary change, especially in non‐native species that may harbor substantial within‐population variability. To test whether urban stressors drive phenotypic differentiation and influence local adaptation, we compared stress responses of populations of a ubiquitous invader, reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). Specifically, we quantified responses to salt, copper, and zinc additions by reed canary grass collected from four populations spanning an urbanization gradient (natural, rural, moderate urban, and intense urban). We measured ten phenotypic traits and trait plasticities, because reed canary grass is known to be highly plastic and because plasticity may enhance invasion success. We tested the following hypotheses: (a) Source populations vary systematically in their stress response, with the intense urban population least sensitive and the natural population most sensitive, and (b) plastic responses are adaptive under stressful conditions. We found clear trait variation among populations, with the greatest divergence in traits and trait plasticities between the natural and intense urban populations. The intense urban population showed stress tolerator characteristics for resource acquisition traits including leaf dry matter content and specific root length. Trait plasticity varied among populations for over half the traits measured, highlighting that plasticity differences were as common as trait differences. Plasticity in root mass ratio and specific root length were adaptive in some contexts, suggesting that natural selection by anthropogenic stressors may have contributed to root trait differences. Reed canary grass populations in highly urbanized wetlands may therefore be evolving enhanced tolerance to urban stressors, suggesting a mechanism by which invasive species may proliferate across urban wetland systems generally.     

The combined effects of temporal autocorrelation and the costs of plasticity on the evolution of plasticity

Adaptive phenotypic plasticity is an important source of intraspecific variation, and for many plastic traits, the costs or factors limiting plasticity seem cryptic. However, there are several different factors that may constrain the evolution of plasticity, but few models have considered costs and limiting factors simultaneously. Here we use a simulation model to investigate how the optimal level of plasticity in a population depends on a fixed maintenance fitness cost for plasticity or an incremental fitness cost for producing a plastic response in combination with environmental unpredictability (environmental fluctuation speed) limiting plasticity. Our model identifies two mechanisms that act, almost separately, to constrain the evolution of plasticity: (i) the fitness cost of plasticity scaled by the nonplastic environmental tolerance, and (ii) the environmental fluctuation speed scaled by the rate of phenotypic change. That is, the evolution of plasticity is constrained by the high cost of plasticity in combination with high tolerance for environmental variation, or fast environmental changes in combination with slow plastic response. Qualitatively similar results are found when maintenance and incremental fitness costs of plasticity are incorporated, although a larger degree of plasticity is selected for with an incremental cost. Our model highlights that it is important to consider direct fitness costs and phenotypic limitations in relation to nonplastic environmental tolerance and environmental fluctuations, respectively, to understand what constrains the evolution of phenotypic plasticity.     

Stress relief may promote the evolution of greater phenotypic plasticity in exotic invasive species: a hypothesis

Invasion ecologists have often found that exotic invaders evolve to be more plastic than conspecific populations from their native range. However, an open question is why some exotic invaders can even evolve to be more plastic given that there may be costs to being plastic. Investigation into the benefits and costs of plasticity suggests that stress may constrain the expression of plasticity (thereby reducing the benefits of plasticity) and exacerbate the costs of plasticity (although this possibility might not be generally applicable). Therefore, evolution of adaptive plasticity is more likely to be constrained in stressful environments. Upon introduction to a new range, exotic species may experience more favorable growth conditions (e.g., because of release from natural enemies). Therefore, we hypothesize that any factors mitigating stress in the introduced range may promote exotic invaders to evolve increased adaptive plasticity by reducing the costs and increasing the benefits of plasticity. Empirical evidence is largely consistent with this hypothesis. This hypothesis contributes to our understanding of why invasive species are often found to be more competitive in a subset of environments. Tests of this hypothesis may not only help us understand what caused increased plasticity in some exotic invaders, but could also tell us if costs (unless very small) are more likely to inhibit the evolution of adaptive plasticity in stressful environments in general.     

Limitations of cross‐ and multigenerational plasticity for marine invertebrates faced with global climate change

Although cross generation (CGP) and multigenerational (MGP) plasticity have been identified as mechanisms of acclimation to global change, the weight of evidence indicates that parental conditioning over generations is not a panacea to rescue stress sensitivity in offspring. For many species, there were no benefits of parental conditioning. Even when improved performance was observed, this waned over time within a generation or across generations and fitness declined. CGP and MGP studies identified resilient species with stress tolerant genotypes in wild populations and selected family lines. Several bivalves possess favourable stress tolerance and phenotypically plastic traits potentially associated with genetic adaptation to life in habitats where they routinely experience temperature and/or acidification stress. These traits will be important to help ‘climate proof’ shellfish ventures. Species that are naturally stress tolerant and those that naturally experience a broad range of environmental conditions are good candidates to provide insights into the physiological and molecular mechanisms involved in CGP and MGP. It is challenging to conduct ecologically relevant global change experiments over the long times commensurate with the pace of changing climate. As a result, many studies present stressors in a shock‐type exposure at rates much faster than projected scenarios. With more gradual stressor introduction over longer experimental durations and in context with conditions species are currently acclimatized and/or adapted to, the outcomes for sensitive species might differ. We highlight the importance to understand primordial germ cell development and the timing of gametogenesis with respect to stressor exposure. Although multigenerational exposure to global change stressors currently appears limited as a universal tool to rescue species in the face of changing climate, natural proxies of future conditions (upwelling zones, CO₂ vents, naturally warm habitats) show that phenotypic adjustment and/or beneficial genetic selection is possible for some species, indicating complex plasticity–adaptation interactions.     

Adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity in changing environments: Implications for sexual species with different life history strategies

Populations adapt to novel environmental conditions by genetic changes or phenotypic plasticity. Plastic responses are generally faster and can buffer fitness losses under variable conditions. Plasticity is typically modeled as random noise and linear reaction norms that assume simple one‐to‐one genotype–phenotype maps and no limits to the phenotypic response. Most studies on plasticity have focused on its effect on population viability. However, it is not clear, whether the advantage of plasticity depends solely on environmental fluctuations or also on the genetic and demographic properties (life histories) of populations. Here we present an individual‐based model and study the relative importance of adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity for populations of sexual species with different life histories experiencing directional stochastic climate change. Environmental fluctuations were simulated using differentially autocorrelated climatic stochasticity or noise color, and scenarios of directional climate change. Nonadaptive plasticity was simulated as a random environmental effect on trait development, while adaptive plasticity as a linear, saturating, or sinusoidal reaction norm. The last two imposed limits to the plastic response and emphasized flexible interactions of the genotype with the environment. Interestingly, this assumption led to (a) smaller phenotypic than genotypic variance in the population (many‐to‐one genotype–phenotype map) and the coexistence of polymorphisms, and (b) the maintenance of higher genetic variation—compared to linear reaction norms and genetic determinism—even when the population was exposed to a constant environment for several generations. Limits to plasticity led to genetic accommodation, when costs were negligible, and to the appearance of cryptic variation when limits were exceeded. We found that adaptive plasticity promoted population persistence under red environmental noise and was particularly important for life histories with low fecundity. Populations producing more offspring could cope with environmental fluctuations solely by genetic changes or random plasticity, unless environmental change was too fast.     

Human influences on rates of phenotypic change in wild animal populations

Human activities can expose populations to dramatic environmental perturbations, which may then precipitate adaptive phenotypic change. We ask whether or not phenotypic changes associated with human-disturbed (anthropogenic) contexts are greater than those associated with more 'natural' contexts. Our meta-analysis is based on more than 3000 rates of phenotypic change in 68 'systems', each representing a given species in a particular geographical area. We find that rates of phenotypic change are greater in anthropogenic contexts than in natural contexts. This difference may be influenced by phenotypic plasticity - because it was evident for studies of wild-caught individuals (which integrate both genetic and plastic effects) but not for common-garden or quantitative genetic studies (which minimize plastic effects). We also find that phenotypic changes in response to disturbance can be remarkably abrupt, perhaps again because of plasticity. In short, humans are an important agent driving phenotypic change in contemporary populations. Although these changes sometimes have a genetic basis, our analyses suggest a particularly important contribution from phenotypic plasticity.     

Collateral damage: rapid exposure-induced evolution of pesticide resistance leads to increased susceptibility to parasites

Although natural populations may evolve resistance to anthropogenic stressors such as pollutants, this evolved resistance may carry costs. Using an experimental evolution approach, we exposed different Daphnia magna populations in outdoor containers to the carbamate pesticide carbaryl and control conditions, and assessed the resulting populations for both their resistance to carbaryl as well as their susceptibility to infection by the widespread bacterial microparasite Pasteuria ramosa. Our results show that carbaryl selection led to rapid evolution of carbaryl resistance with seemingly no cost when assessed in a benign environment. However, carbaryl-resistant populations were more susceptible to parasite infection than control populations. Exposure to both stressors reveals a synergistic effect on sterilization rate by P. ramosa, but this synergism did not evolve under pesticide selection. Assessing costs of rapid adaptive evolution to anthropogenic stress in a semi-natural context may be crucial to avoid too optimistic predictions for the fitness of the evolving populations.     

Phenotypic plasticity is not affected by experimental evolution in constant,predictable or unpredictable fluctuating thermal environments

The selective past of populations is presumed to affect the levels of phenotypic plasticity. Experimental evolution at constant temperatures is generally expected to lead to a decreased level of plasticity due to presumed costs associated with phenotypic plasticity when not needed. In this study, we investigated the effect of experimental evolution in constant, predictable and unpredictable daily fluctuating temperature regimes on the levels of phenotype plasticity in several life history and stress resistance traits in Drosophila simulans. Contrary to the expectation, evolution in the different regimes did not affect the levels of plasticity in any of the traits investigated even though the populations from the different thermal regimes had evolved different stress resistance and fitness trait means. Although costs associated with phenotypic plasticity are known, our results suggest that the maintenance of phenotypic plasticity might come at low and negligible costs, and thus, the potential of phenotypic plasticity to evolve in populations exposed to different environmental conditions might be limited.     

The ghosts of selection past reduces the probability of plastic rescue but increases the likelihood of evolutionary rescue to novel stressors in experimental populations of wild yeast

Persistence by adaptation is called evolutionary rescue. Evolutionary rescue is more likely in populations that have been previously exposed to lower doses of the same stressor. Environmental fluctuations might also reduce the possibility of rescue, but little is known about the effect of evolutionary history on the likelihood of rescue. In this study, we hypothesised that the ubiquitous operation of generalised stress responses in many organisms increases the likelihood of rescue after exposure to other stressors. We tested this hypothesis with experimental populations that had been exposed to long‐term starvation and were then selected on different, unrelated stressors. We found that prior adaptation to starvation imposes contrary effects on the plastic and evolutionary responses of populations to subsequent stressors. When first exposed to new stressors, such populations become extinct more often. If they survive the initial exposure to the new stressors, however, they are more likely to undergo evolutionary rescue.     

Evolutionary and Ecological Effects of Multi-Generational Exposures to Anthropogenic Stressors

Biological and ecological responses to stress are dictated by duration and frequency, as well as instantaneous magnitude. Conditional compensatory responses at the physiological and behavioral levels, referred to as ‘acclimation’, may mitigate effects on individuals experiencing brief or infrequent periods of moderate stress. However, even modest stress over extended periods may reduce the fitness of some or all exposed individuals. In this way, specific stress that persists over multiple generations will increase probabilities for extinction of populations composed of sensitive individuals. For populations whose members demonstrate variance and heritability for stressor response, this selective loss of sensitive individuals may result in populations dominated by resistant individuals. The formation of these ‘adapted’ populations may be considered an ecological compensatory mechanism to multi-generational stress. Paradoxically, the biological costs to individuals of toxicity and physiological acclimation may result in obvious signs of stress in affected wildlife populations while the costs of genetic adaptation may be more covert. It is important to consider such costs because recent evidence suggests that anthropogenic stressors have acted as powerful selection agents that have modified the composition of wildlife populations subjected for successive generational exposures to specific stressors. This essay focuses on a case study where adaptation has been demonstrated in fish populations with a history of chronic exposure to persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic environmental contaminants. Because the magnitude, breadth and long-term outcomes of such changes are unknown, ecological risk assessments that are limited in focus to short-term exposures and consequences may seriously underestimate the ecological and evolutionary impacts of anthropogenic stressors.     

Genotypic variation in phenological plasticity: Reciprocal common gardens reveal adaptive responses to warmer springs but not to fall frost

Species faced with rapidly shifting environments must be able to move, adapt, or acclimate in order to survive. One mechanism to meet this challenge is phenotypic plasticity: altering phenotype in response to environmental change. Here, we investigated the magnitude, direction, and consequences of changes in two key phenology traits (fall bud set and spring bud flush) in a widespread riparian tree species, Populus fremontii. Using replicated genotypes from 16 populations from throughout the species’ thermal range, and reciprocal common gardens at hot, warm, and cool sites, we identified four major findings: (a) There are significant genetic (G), environmental (E), and GxE components of variation for both traits across three common gardens; (b) The magnitude of phenotypic plasticity is correlated with provenance climate, where trees from hotter, southern populations exhibited up to four times greater plasticity compared to the northern, frost‐adapted populations; (c) Phenological mismatches are correlated with higher mortality as the transfer distances between provenance and garden increase; and (d) The relationship between plasticity and survival depends not only on the magnitude and direction of environmental transfer, but also on the type of environmental stress (i.e., heat or freezing), and how particular traits have evolved in response to that stress. Trees transferred to warmer climates generally showed small to moderate shifts in an adaptive direction, a hopeful result for climate change. Trees experiencing cooler climates exhibited large, non‐adaptive changes, suggesting smaller transfer distances for assisted migration. This study is especially important as it deconstructs trait responses to environmental cues that are rapidly changing (e.g., temperature and spring onset) and those that are fixed (photoperiod), and that vary across the species’ range. Understanding the magnitude and adaptive nature of phenotypic plasticity of multiple traits responding to multiple environmental cues is key to guiding restoration management decisions as climate continues to change.     

Comparing the effects of rapid evolution and phenotypic plasticity on predator-prey dynamics

Ecologists have increasingly focused on how rapid adaptive trait changes can affect population dynamics. Rapid adaptation can result from either rapid evolution or phenotypic plasticity, but their effects on population dynamics are seldom compared directly. Here we examine theoretically the effects of rapid evolution and phenotypic plasticity of antipredatory defense on predator-prey dynamics. Our analyses reveal that phenotypic plasticity tends to stabilize population dynamics more strongly than rapid evolution. It is therefore important to know the mechanism by which phenotypic variation is generated for predicting the dynamics of rapidly adapting populations. We next examine an advantage of a phenotypically plastic prey genotype over the polymorphism of specialist prey genotypes. Numerical analyses reveal that the plastic genotype, if there is a small cost for maintaining it, cannot coexist with the pairs of specialist counterparts unless the system has a limit cycle. Furthermore, for the plastic genotype to replace specialist genotypes, a forced environmental fluctuation is critical in a broad parameter range. When these results are combined, the plastic genotype enjoys an advantage with population oscillations, but plasticity tends to lose its advantage by stabilizing the oscillations. This dilemma leads to an interesting intermittent limit cycle with the changing frequency of phenotypic plasticity.     

Lizards fail to plastically adjust nesting behavior or thermal tolerance as needed to buffer populations from climate warming

Although observations suggest the potential for phenotypic plasticity to allow adaptive responses to climate change, few experiments have assessed that potential. Modeling suggests that Sceloporus tristichus lizards will need increased nest depth, shade cover, or embryonic thermal tolerance to avoid reproductive failure resulting from climate change. To test for such plasticity, we experimentally examined how maternal temperatures affect nesting behavior and embryonic thermal sensitivity. The temperature regime that females experienced while gravid did not affect nesting behavior, but warmer temperatures at the time of nesting reduced nest depth. Additionally, embryos from heat‐stressed mothers displayed increased sensitivity to high‐temperature exposure. Simulations suggest that critically low temperatures, rather than high temperatures, historically limit development of our study population. Thus, the plasticity needed to buffer this population has not been under selection. Plasticity will likely fail to compensate for ongoing climate change when such change results in novel stressors.     

Phenotypic plasticity in two marine snails: constraints superseding life history

In organisms encountering predictable environments, fixed development is expected, whereas in organisms that cannot predict their future environment, phenotypic plasticity would be optimal to increase local adaptation. To test this prediction we experimentally compared phenotypic plasticity in two rocky-shore snail species; Littorina saxatilis releasing miniature snails on the shore, and Littorina littorea releasing drifting larvae settling on various shores, expecting L. littorea to show more phenotypic plasticity than L. saxatilis. We compared magnitude and direction of vectors of phenotypic difference in juvenile shell traits after 3 months exposure to different stimuli simulating sheltered and crab-rich shores, or wave-exposed and crab-free shores. Both species showed similar direction and magnitude of vectors of phenotypic difference with minor differences only between ecotypes of the nondispersing species, indicating that plasticity is an evolving trait in L. saxatilis. The lack of a strong plastic response in L. littorea might be explained by limits rather than costs to plasticity.     

Abiotic genetic adaptation in the Fagaceae

Fagaceae can be found in tropical and temperate regions and contain species of major ecological and economic importance. In times of global climate change, tree populations need to adapt to rapidly changing environmental conditions. The predicted warmer and drier conditions will potentially result in locally maladapted populations. There is evidence that major genera of the Fagaceae are already negatively affected by climate change‐related factors such as drought and associated biotic stressors. Therefore, knowledge of the mechanisms underlying adaptation is of great interest. In this review, we summarise current literature related to genetic adaptation to abiotic environmental conditions. We begin with an overview of genetic diversity in Fagaceae species and then summarise current knowledge related to drought stress tolerance, bud burst timing and frost tolerance in the Fagaceae. Finally, we discuss the role of hybridisation, epigenetics and phenotypic plasticity in adaptation.     

Phenotypic plasticity closely linked to climate at origin and resulting in increased mortality under warming and frost stress in a common grass

Phenotypic plasticity is important for species responses to global change and species coexistence. Phenotypic plasticity differs among species and traits and changes across environments. Here, we investigated phenotypic plasticity of the widespread grass Arrhenatherum elatius in response to winter warming and frost stress by comparing phenotypic plasticity of 11 geographically and environmentally distinct populations of this species to phenotypic plasticity of populations of different species originating from a single environment. The variation in phenotypic plasticity was similar for populations of a single species from different locations compared to populations of functionally and taxonomically diverse species from one environment for the studied traits (leaf biomass production and root integrity after frost) across three indices of phenotypic plasticity (RDPI, PIN, slope of reaction norm). Phenotypic plasticity was not associated with neutral genetic diversity but closely linked to the climate of the populations’ origin. Populations originating from warmer and more variable climates showed higher phenotypic plasticity. This indicates that phenotypic plasticity can itself be considered as a trait subject to local adaptation to climate. Finally, our data emphasize that high phenotypic plasticity is not per se positive for adaptation to climate change, as differences in stress responses are resulting in high phenotypic plasticity as expressed by common plasticity indices, which is likely to be related to increased mortality under stress in more plastic populations.     

Constraints on the evolution of phenotypic plasticity: limits and costs of phenotype and plasticity

Phenotypic plasticity is ubiquitous and generally regarded as a key mechanism for enabling organisms to survive in the face of environmental change. Because no organism is infinitely or ideally plastic, theory suggests that there must be limits (for example, the lack of ability to produce an optimal trait) to the evolution of phenotypic plasticity, or that plasticity may have inherent significant costs. Yet numerous experimental studies have not detected widespread costs. Explicitly differentiating plasticity costs from phenotype costs, we re-evaluate fundamental questions of the limits to the evolution of plasticity and of generalists vs specialists. We advocate for the view that relaxed selection and variable selection intensities are likely more important constraints to the evolution of plasticity than the costs of plasticity. Some forms of plasticity, such as learning, may be inherently costly. In addition, we examine opportunities to offset costs of phenotypes through ontogeny, amelioration of phenotypic costs across environments, and the condition-dependent hypothesis. We propose avenues of further inquiry in the limits of plasticity using new and classic methods of ecological parameterization, phylogenetics and omics in the context of answering questions on the constraints of plasticity. Given plasticity''s key role in coping with environmental change, approaches spanning the spectrum from applied to basic will greatly enrich our understanding of the evolution of plasticity and resolve our understanding of limits.