The role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution

Models of population divergence and speciation are often based on the assumption that differences between populations are due to genetic factors, and that phenotypic change is due to natural selection. It is equally plausible that some of the differences among populations are due to phenotypic plasticity. We use the metaphor of the adaptive landscape to review the role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution. Moderate levels of phenotypic plasticity are optimal in permitting population survival in a new environment and in bringing populations into the realm of attraction of an adaptive peak. High levels of plasticity may increase the probability of population persistence but reduce the likelihood of genetic change, because the plastic response itself places the population close to a peak. Moderate levels of plasticity arise whenever multiple traits, some of which are plastic and others not, form a composite trait involved in the adaptive response. For example, altered behaviours may drive selection on morphology and physiology. Because there is likely to be a considerable element of chance in which behaviours become established, behavioural change followed by morphological and physiological evolution may be a potent force in driving evolution in novel directions. We assess the role of phenotypic plasticity in stimulating evolution by considering two examples from birds: (i) the evolution of red and yellow plumage coloration due to carotenoid consumption; and (ii) the evolution of foraging behaviours on islands. Phenotypic plasticity is widespread in nature and may speed up, slow down, or have little effect on evolutionary change. Moderate levels of plasticity may often facilitate genetic evolution but careful analyses of individual cases are needed to ascertain whether plasticity has been essential or merely incidental to population differentiation.     

Adaptation to an extraordinary environment by evolution of phenotypic plasticity and genetic assimilation

Adaptation to a sudden extreme change in environment, beyond the usual range of background environmental fluctuations, is analysed using a quantitative genetic model of phenotypic plasticity. Generations are discrete, with time lag τ between a critical period for environmental influence on individual development and natural selection on adult phenotypes. The optimum phenotype, and genotypic norms of reaction, are linear functions of the environment. Reaction norm elevation and slope (plasticity) vary among genotypes. Initially, in the average background environment, the character is canalized with minimum genetic and phenotypic variance, and no correlation between reaction norm elevation and slope. The optimal plasticity is proportional to the predictability of environmental fluctuations over time lag τ. During the first generation in the new environment the mean fitness suddenly drops and the mean phenotype jumps towards the new optimum phenotype by plasticity. Subsequent adaptation occurs in two phases. Rapid evolution of increased plasticity allows the mean phenotype to closely approach the new optimum. The new phenotype then undergoes slow genetic assimilation, with reduction in plasticity compensated by genetic evolution of reaction norm elevation in the original environment.     

Assessing the impacts of phenotypic plasticity on evolution

In the past decade, there has been a resurgent interest in whether and how phenotypic plasticity might impact evolutionary processes. Of fundamental importance is how the environment influences individual phenotypic development while simultaneously selecting among phenotypic variants in a population. Conceptual and theoretical treatments of the evolutionary implications of plasticity are numerous, as are criticisms of the conclusions. As such, the time is ripe for empirical evidence to catch up with theoretical predictions. To this end, I provide a summary of eight hypotheses at the core of this issue, highlighting various approaches by which they can be tested. My goal is to provide practical guidance to those seeking to understand the complex ways by which phenotypic plasticity can influence evolutionary innovation and diversification.     

Selection in a fluctuating environment leads to decreased genetic variation and facilitates the evolution of phenotypic plasticity

Changes in the environment are expected to induce changes in the quantitative genetic variation, which influences the ability of a population to adapt to environmental change. Furthermore, environmental changes are not constant in time, but fluctuate. Here, we investigate the effect of rapid, continuous and/or fluctuating temperature changes in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus, using an evolution experiment followed by a split-brood experiment. In line with expectations, individuals responded in a plastic way and had an overall higher potential to respond to selection after a rapid change in the environment. After selection in an environment with increasing temperature, plasticity remained unchanged (or decreased) and environmental variation decreased, especially when fluctuations were added; these results were unexpected. As expected, the genetic variation decreased after fluctuating selection. Our results suggest that fluctuations in the environment have major impact on the response of a population to environmental change; in a highly variable environment with low predictability, a plastic response might not be beneficial and the response is genetically and environmentally canalized resulting in a low potential to respond to selection and low environmental sensitivity. Interestingly, we found greater variation for phenotypic plasticity after selection, suggesting that the potential for plasticity to evolve is facilitated after exposure to environmental fluctuations. Our study highlights that environmental fluctuations should be considered when investigating the response of a population to environmental change.     

Adaptation to marginal habitats by evolution of increased phenotypic plasticity

In an island population receiving immigrants from a larger continental population, gene flow causes maladaptation, decreasing mean fitness and producing continued directional selection to restore the local mean phenotype to its optimum. We show that this causes higher plasticity to evolve on the island than on the continent at migration-selection equilibrium, assuming genetic variation of reaction norms is such that phenotypic variance is higher on the island, where phenotypes are not canalized. For a species distributed continuously in space along an environmental gradient, higher plasticity evolves at the edges of the geographic range, and in environments where phenotypes are not canalized. Constant or evolving partially adaptive plasticity also alleviates maladaptation owing to gene flow in a heterogeneous environment and produces higher mean fitness and larger population size in marginal populations, preventing them from becoming sinks and facilitating invasion of new habitats. Our results shed light on the widely observed involvement of partially adaptive plasticity in phenotypic clines, and on the mechanisms causing geographic variation in plasticity.     

Assortative mating can limit the evolution of phenotypic plasticity

Phenotypic plasticity, the ability to adjust phenotype to the exposed environment, is often advantageous for organisms living in heterogeneous environments. Although the degree of plasticity appears limited in nature, many studies have reported low costs of plasticity in various species. Existing studies argue for ecological, genetic, or physiological costs or selection eliminating plasticity with high costs, but have not considered costs arising from sexual selection. Here, we show that sexual selection caused by mate choice can impede the evolution of phenotypic plasticity in a trait used for mate choice. Plasticity can remain low to moderate even in the absence of physiological or genetic costs, when individuals phenotypically adapted to contrasting environments through plasticity can mate with each other and choose mates based on phenotypic similarity. Because the non-choosy sex (i.e., males) with lower degrees of plasticity are more favored in matings by the choosy sex (i.e., females) adapted to different environments, directional selection toward higher degrees of plasticity is constrained by sexual selection. This occurs at intermediate strengths of female choosiness in the range of the parameter value we examined. Our results demonstrate that mate choice is a potential source of an indirect cost to phenotypic plasticity in a sexually selected plastic trait.     

Correlated evolution of phenotypic plasticity in metamorphic timing

Phenotypic plasticity has long been a focus of research, but the mechanisms of its evolution remain controversial. Many amphibian species exhibit a similar plastic response in metamorphic timing in response to multiple environmental factors; therefore, more than one environmental factor has likely influenced the evolution of plasticity. However, it is unclear whether the plastic responses to different factors have evolved independently. In this study, we examined the relationship between the plastic responses to two experimental factors (water level and food type) in larvae of the salamander Hynobius retardatus, using a cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model on the time to completion of metamorphosis. Larvae from ephemeral ponds metamorphosed earlier than those from permanent ponds when kept at a low water level or fed conspecific larvae instead of larval Chironomidae. This acceleration of metamorphosis depended only on the permanency of the larvae's pond of origin, but not on the conspecific larval density (an indicator of the frequency of cannibalism) in the ponds. The two plastic responses were significantly correlated, indicating that they may evolve correlatively. Once plasticity evolved as an adaptation to habitat desiccation, it might have relatively easily become a response to other ecological factors, such as food type via the pre-existing developmental pathway.     

The effects of phenotypic plasticity on genetic correlations

Recent theory suggests that genetic correlations should help to predict the simultaneous response to selection of two or more traits, and much recent research has been directed towards understanding the sources of variation in genetic correlations. Genetic correlations can change from sample to sample, from species to species, from population to population, during the course of development and - within a population, at a fixed stage of development - from one environment to another. These are changes not only in magnitude but also in sign. Theory suggests that genetic correlations should not change sign when the two traits are tightly integrated by physiology or development. Patterns of change of genetic correlations are caused by differences in development and physiology, an understanding of which appears to be necessary to predict the response to selection in natural, heterogeneous environments.     

A role for phenotypic plasticity in the evolution of aposematism

The evolution of warning coloration (aposematism) has been difficult to explain because rare conspicuous mutants should suffer a higher cost of discovery by predators relative to the cryptic majority, while at frequencies too low to facilitate predator aversion learning. Traditional models for the evolution of aposematism have assumed conspicuous prey phenotypes to be genetically determined and constitutive. By contrast, we have recently come to understand that warning coloration can be environmentally determined and mediated by local prey density, thereby reducing the initial costs of conspicuousness. The expression of density-dependent colour polyphenism is widespread among the insects and may provide an alternative pathway for the evolution of constitutive aposematic phenotypes in unpalatable prey by providing a protected intermediate stage. If density-dependent aposematism can function as an adaptive intermediate stage for the evolution of constitutive aposematic phenotypes, differential reaction norm evolution is predicted among related palatable and unpalatable prey populations. Here, I present empirical evidence that indicates that (i) the expression of density-dependent colour polyphenism has differentially evolved between palatable and unpalatable populations of the grasshopper Schistocerca emarginata (= lineata) (Orthoptera: Acrididae), and (ii) variation in plasticity between these populations is commensurate with the expected costs of conspicuousness.     

Constraints on the evolution of adaptive phenotypic plasticity in plants

The high potential fitness benefit of phenotypic plasticity tempts us to expect phenotypic plasticity as a frequent adaptation to environmental heterogeneity. Examples of proven adaptive plasticity in plants, however, are scarce and most plastic responses actually may be 'passive' rather than adaptive. This suggests that frequently requirements for the evolution of adaptive plasticity are not met or that such evolution is impeded by constraints. Here we outline requirements and potential constraints for the evolution of adaptive phenotypic plasticity, identify open questions, and propose new research approaches. Important open questions concern the genetic background of plasticity, genetic variation in plasticity, selection for plasticity in natural habitats, and the nature and occurrence of costs and limits of plasticity. Especially promising tools to address these questions are selection gradient analysis, meta-analysis of studies on genotype-by-environment interactions, QTL analysis, cDNA-microarray scanning and quantitative PCR to quantify gene expression, and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis to quantify protein expression. Studying plasticity along the pathway from gene expression to the phenotype and its relationship with fitness will help us to better understand why adaptive plasticity is not more universal, and to more realistically predict the evolution of plastic responses to environmental change.     

Life history as a constraint on plasticity: developmental timing is correlated with phenotypic variation in birds

Understanding why organisms vary in developmental plasticity has implications for predicting population responses to changing environments and the maintenance of intraspecific variation. The epiphenotype hypothesis posits that the timing of development can constrain plasticity—the earlier alternate phenotypes begin to develop, the greater the difference that can result amongst the final traits. This research extends this idea by considering how life history timing shapes the opportunity for the environment to influence trait development. We test the prediction that the earlier an individual begins to actively interact with and explore their environment, the greater the opportunity for plasticity and thus variation in foraging traits. This research focuses on life history variation across four groups of birds using museum specimens and measurements from the literature. We reasoned that greater phenotypic plasticity, through either environmental effects or genotype-by-environment interactions in development, would be manifest in larger trait ranges (bills and tarsi) within species. Among shorebirds and ducks, we found that species with relatively shorter incubation times tended to show greater phenotypic variation. Across warblers and sparrows, we found little support linking timing of flight and trait variation. Overall, our results also suggest a pattern between body size and trait variation, consistent with constraints on egg size that might result in larger species having more environmental influences on development. Taken together, our results provide some support for the hypothesis that variation in life histories affects how the environment shapes development, through either the expression of plasticity or the release of cryptic genetic variation.     

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.     

Using genetic networks and homology to understand the evolution of phenotypic traits

Homology can have different meanings for different kinds of biologists. A phylogenetic view holds that homology, defined by common ancestry, is rigorously identified through phylogenetic analysis. Such homologies are taxic homologies (=synapomorphies). A second interpretation, "biological homology" emphasizes common ancestry through the continuity of genetic information underlying phenotypic traits, and is favored by some developmental geneticists. A third kind of homology, deep homology, was recently defined as "the sharing of the genetic regulatory apparatus used to build morphologically and phylogenetically disparate features." Here we explain the commonality among these three versions of homology. We argue that biological homology, as evidenced by a conserved gene regulatory network giving a trait its "essential identity" (a Character Identity Network or "ChIN") must also be a taxic homology. In cases where a phenotypic trait has been modified over the course of evolution such that homology (taxic) is obscured (e.g. jaws are modified gill arches), a shared underlying ChIN provides evidence of this transformation. Deep homologies, where molecular and cellular components of a phenotypic trait precede the trait itself (are phylogenetically deep relative to the trait), are also taxic homologies, undisguised. Deep homologies inspire particular interest for understanding the evolutionary assembly of phenotypic traits. Mapping these deeply homologous building blocks on a phylogeny reveals the sequential steps leading to the origin of phenotypic novelties. Finally, we discuss how new genomic technologies will revolutionize the comparative genomic study of non-model organisms in a phylogenetic context, necessary to understand the evolution of phenotypic traits.     

Environmental change, phenotypic plasticity, and genetic compensation

When a species encounters novel environmental conditions, some phenotypic characters may develop differently than in the ancestral environment. Most environmental perturbations of development are likely to reduce fitness, and thus selection would usually be expected to favor genetic changes that restore the ancestral phenotype. I propose the term "genetic compensation" to refer to this form of adaptive evolution. Genetic compensation is a subset of genetic accommodation and the reverse of genetic assimilation. When genetic compensation has occurred along a spatial environmental gradient, the mean trait values of populations in different environments may be more similar in the field than when representatives of the same populations are raised in a common environment (i.e., countergradient variation). If compensation is complete, genetic divergence between populations may be cryptic, that is, not detectable in the field. Here I apply the concept of genetic compensation to three examples involving carotenoid-based sexual coloration and then use these and other examples to discuss the concept in a broader context. I show that genetic compensation may lead to a cryptic form of reproductive isolation between populations evolving in different environments, may explain some puzzling cases in which heritable traits exposed to strong directional selection fail to show the expected evolutionary response, and may complicate efforts to monitor populations for signs of environmental deterioration.     

Combining genetic variation and phenotypic plasticity in tradeoff modelling

Tradeoffs lead to antagonistic relationships between phenotypic traits and are thought to be determined both genetically and environmentally. We present here an allocation model that distinguishes between the genetic and environmental components of variation in resource allocation. In this model we introduced plasticity of resource allocation which was considered to be an adaptive response to environmental variations. The results show that resource allocation plasticity is a key parameter for the existence of environmental (i.e. inter environments and intra genotype) correlations and is therefore necessary to detect environment-induced tradeoffs. We also investigated the impact of the resource allocation plasticity and other factors on genetic (i.e. inter genotypes) correlations. Our results show that resource allocation plasticity induces a masking effect of tradeoffs when studying genetic correlations and increases the masking effect of resource variation by making apparent correlations positive when negative correlations are expected. In addition, by simulating different sources of resource acquisition variation, we demonstrated that resource variation might have different effects on correlations according to the experimental design and the studied biological material. Further development of this model may be used to investigate the theoretical implications of tradeoffs in evolutionary biology and to improve design and interpretation of experimental studies.     

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.     

Using phenotypic plasticity to understand the structure and evolution of the genotype–phenotype map

Genetica - Deciphering the genotype–phenotype map necessitates relating variation at the genetic level to variation at the phenotypic level. This endeavour is inherently limited by the...