Phenotypic variability can promote the evolution of adaptive plasticity by reducing the stringency of natural selection

Adaptive phenotypic plasticity is a potent but not ubiquitous solution to environmental heterogeneity, driving interest in what factors promote and limit its evolution. Here, a novel computational model representing stochastic information flow in development is used to explore evolution from a constitutive phenotype to an adaptively plastic response. Results show that populations tend to evolve robustness to developmental stochasticity, but that this evolved robustness limits evolvability; specifically, robust genotypes have less ability to evolve adaptive plasticity when presented with a mix of both the ancestral environment and a new environment. Analytic calculations and computational experiments confirm that this constraint occurs when the initial mutational steps towards plasticity are pleiotropic, such that mutant fitnesses decline in the environment to which their parents are well‐adapted. Greater phenotypic variability improves evolvability in the model by lessening this decline as well as by improving the fitness of partial adaptations to the new environment. By making initial plastic mutations more palatable to natural selection, phenotypic variability can increase the evolvability of an innovative, plastic response without improving evolvability to simpler challenges such as a shifted optimum in a single environment. Populations that evolved robustness by negative feedback between the trait and its rate of change show a particularly strong constraining effect on the evolvability of plasticity, revealing another mechanism by which evolutionary history can limit later innovation. These results document a novel mechanism by which weakening selection could actually stimulate the evolution of a major innovation.     

DEVELOPMENTAL PLASTICITY,GENETIC VARIATION,AND THE EVOLUTION OF ANDROMONOECY IN SOLANUM HIRTUM (SOLANACEAE)

Studies of andromonoecious species have shown that sex expression (proportions of hermaphrodite and staminate flowers) is quite variable. It is not known, however, whether this variation is due to variation among individuals for genetically fixed patterns of allocation to staminate and hermaphrodite flowers (population level variation) and/or to developmental plasticity of individuals in a heterogeneous environment (organismal level variation). Distinguishing between these two levels of variation is important for understanding the evolution of andromonoecy. This study investigates levels of variation in sex expression in the andromonoecious Solanum hirlum. Sex expression in this species is shown to be plastic among individuals of the same genotype (organismal level variation) and determined, in part, by the resource status of the individual. Among the genotypes examined there is also genetic variation for developmental plasticity. Thus, developmental plasticity can potentially respond to selection, and the evolution of this developmental system may have been instrumental in the establishment and maintenance of andromonoecy in S. hirtum.     

Constraints on the evolution of adaptive plasticity: costs of plasticity to density are expressed in segregating progenies

Phenotypic plasticity, the ability of a genotype to express different phenotypes across environments, is an adaptive strategy expected to evolve in heterogeneous environments. One widely held hypothesis is that the evolutionary benefits of plasticity are reduced by its costs, but when compared with the number of traits tested, the evidence for costs is limited. Selection gradients were calculated for traits and trait plasticities to test for costs of plasticity to density in a field study using recombinant inbred lines (RILs) of Brassica rapa. Significant costs of putatively adaptive plasticity were found in three out of six measured traits. For one trait, petiole length, a cost of plasticity was detected in both environments tested; such global costs are expected to more strongly constrain the evolution of plasticity than local costs expressed in a single environment. These results, in combination with evidence from studies in segregating progenies of Arabidopsis thaliana, suggest that the potential for genetic costs of plasticity exists in natural populations. Detection of costs in previous studies may have been limited because historical selection has purged genotypes with costly plasticity, and experimental conditions often lack environmental stresses.     

Animal learning as a source of developmental bias

As a form of adaptive plasticity that allows organisms to shift their phenotype toward the optimum, learning is inherently a source of developmental bias. Learning may be of particular significance to the evolutionary biology community because it allows animals to generate adaptively biased novel behavior tuned to the environment and, through social learning, to propagate behavioral traits to other individuals, also in an adaptively biased manner. We describe several types of developmental bias manifest in learning, including an adaptive bias, historical bias, origination bias, and transmission bias, stressing that these can influence evolutionary dynamics through generating nonrandom phenotypic variation and/or nonrandom environmental states. Theoretical models and empirical data have established that learning can impose direction on adaptive evolution, affect evolutionary rates (both speeding up and slowing down responses to selection under different conditions) and outcomes, influence the probability of populations reaching global optimum, and affect evolvability. Learning is characterized by highly specific, path‐dependent interactions with the (social and physical) environment, often resulting in new phenotypic outcomes. Consequently, learning regularly introduces novelty into phenotype space. These considerations imply that learning may commonly generate plasticity first evolution.     

Phenotypic plasticity as a component of evolutionary change

Phenotypic plasticity has often been assumed to buffer the effects of natural selection and thus act as a constraint on evolutionary change. It has become increasingly clear, however, that phenotypic plasticity actually represents a fundamental component of evolutionary change. Where genetic variation for plasticity exists, a population with a different mean plasticity can evolve. Recent attention has been focused on the conditions necessary for the evolution of phenotypic plasticity, i.e. those under which a generalist strategy, as opposed to a range of genetically differentiated specialists, will be favoured. It is also now clear that genotypes that perform best in one environment usually perform less well than other genotypes in a different environment; hence, their greater response is not an adaptation to environmental variation. A response to environmental variation is only adaptive if it represents a mechanism by which relative fitness is maintained in the face of environmental variation. Adaptive plasticity may thus involve both physiological homeostasis and morphological response.     

Epigenetics and the maintenance of developmental plasticity: extending the signalling theory framework

Developmental plasticity, a phenomenon of importance in both evolutionary biology and human studies of the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD), enables organisms to respond to their environment based on previous experience without changes to the underlying nucleotide sequence. Although such phenotypic responses should theoretically improve an organism's fitness and performance in its future environment, this is not always the case. Herein, we first discuss epigenetics as an adaptive mechanism of developmental plasticity and use signaling theory to provide an evolutionary context for DOHaD phenomena within a generation. Next, we utilize signalling theory to identify determinants of adaptive developmental plasticity, detect sources of random variability – also known as process errors that affect maintenance of an epigenetic signal (DNA methylation) over time, and discuss implications of these errors for an organism's health and fitness. Finally, we apply life‐course epidemiology conceptual models to inform study design and analytical strategies that are capable of parsing out the potential effects of process errors in the relationships among an organism's early environment, DNA methylation, and phenotype in a future environment. Ultimately, we hope to foster cross‐talk and interdisciplinary collaboration between evolutionary biology and DOHaD epidemiology, which have historically remained separate despite a shared interest in developmental plasticity.     

Developmental plasticity and evolution—quo vadis?

The role of developmental (phenotypic) plasticity in ecology and evolution is receiving a growing appreciation among the biologists, and many plasticity-specific concepts have become well established as part of the mainstream evolutionary biological thinking. In this essay, I posit that despite this progress several key perspectives in developmental plasticity remain remarkably traditional, and that it may be time to re-evaluate their continued usefulness in the face of the available evidence as the field looks to its future. Specifically, I discuss the utility of viewing plastic development as ultimately rooted in genes and genomes, and investigate the common notion that the environment—albeit a critical source of information—nevertheless remains passive, external to and separable from the organism responding to it. I end by highlighting conceptual and empirical opportunities that may permit developmental plasticity research to transcend its current boundaries and to continue its contributions toward a holistic and realistic understanding of organismal development and evolution.     

Plasticity as a developing trait: exploring the implications

Individual differences in plasticity have been classically framed as genotype-by-environment interactions, with different genotypes showing different reaction norms in response to environmental conditions. However, research has shown that early experience can be a critical factor in shaping an individual's plasticity to later environmental factors. In other words, plasticity itself can be investigated as a developing trait that reflects the combined action of an individual's genes and previous interactions with the environment. In this paper I explore some implications of the idea that the early environment modulates long-term plasticity, with an emphasis on plasticity in behavioral traits. I begin by focusing on the mechanisms that mediate plasticity at the proximate level, and discussing the possibility that some traits may work as generalized mediators of plasticity by affecting the sensitivity of multiple phenol types across developmental contexts. I then tackle the complex problem of the evolution of reaction norms for plasticity. Next, I consider a number of potential implications for research on parental effects and phenotypic matching, and conclude by discussing how plasticity may become a target of evolutionary conflict between parents and offspring. In total, I aim to show how the idea of plasticity as a developing trait offers a rich source of questions and insights that may inform future research in this area.     

Social plasticity in fish: integrating mechanisms and function

Social plasticity is a ubiquitous feature of animal behaviour. Animals must adjust the expression of their social behaviour to the nuances of daily social life and to the transitions between life‐history stages, and the ability to do so affects their Darwinian fitness. Here, an integrative framework is proposed for understanding the proximate mechanisms and ultimate consequences of social plasticity. According to this framework, social plasticity is achieved by rewiring or by biochemically switching nodes of the neural network underlying social behaviour in response to perceived social information. Therefore, at the molecular level, it depends on the social regulation of gene expression, so that different brain genomic and epigenetic states correspond to different behavioural responses and the switches between states are orchestrated by signalling pathways that interface the social environment and the genotype. At the evolutionary scale, social plasticity can be seen as an adaptive trait that can be under positive selection when changes in the environment outpace the rate of genetic evolutionary change. In cases when social plasticity is too costly or incomplete, behavioural consistency can emerge by directional selection that recruits gene modules corresponding to favoured behavioural states in that environment. As a result of this integrative approach, how knowledge of the proximate mechanisms underlying social plasticity is crucial to understanding its costs, limits and evolutionary consequences is shown, thereby highlighting the fact that proximate mechanisms contribute to the dynamics of selection. The role of teleosts as a premier model to study social plasticity is also highlighted, given the diversity and plasticity that this group exhibits in terms of social behaviour. Finally, the proposed integrative framework to social plasticity also illustrates how reciprocal causation analysis of biological phenomena (i.e. considering the interaction between proximate factors and evolutionary explanations) can be a more useful approach than the traditional proximate–ultimate dichotomy, according to which evolutionary processes can be understood without knowledge on proximate causes, thereby black‐boxing developmental and physiological mechanisms.     

Iterative development and the scope for plasticity: contrasts among trait categories in an adaptive radiation

Phenotypic plasticity can influence evolutionary change in a lineage, ranging from facilitation of population persistence in a novel environment to directing the patterns of evolutionary change. As the specific nature of plasticity can impact evolutionary consequences, it is essential to consider how plasticity is manifested if we are to understand the contribution of plasticity to phenotypic evolution. Most morphological traits are developmentally plastic, irreversible, and generally considered to be costly, at least when the resultant phenotype is mis-matched to the environment. At the other extreme, behavioral phenotypes are typically activational (modifiable on very short time scales), and not immediately costly as they are produced by constitutive neural networks. Although patterns of morphological and behavioral plasticity are often compared, patterns of plasticity of life history phenotypes are rarely considered. Here we review patterns of plasticity in these trait categories within and among populations, comprising the adaptive radiation of the threespine stickleback fish Gasterosteus aculeatus. We immediately found it necessary to consider the possibility of iterated development, the concept that behavioral and life history trajectories can be repeatedly reset on activational (usually behavior) or developmental (usually life history) time frames, offering fine tuning of the response to environmental context. Morphology in stickleback is primarily reset only in that developmental trajectories can be altered as environments change over the course of development. As anticipated, the boundaries between the trait categories are not clear and are likely to be linked by shared, underlying physiological and genetic systems.     

DEVELOPMENTAL INSTABILITY IS GENETICALLY CORRELATED WITH PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY,CONSTRAINING HERITABILITY,AND FITNESS

Although adaptive plasticity would seem always to be favored by selection, it occurs less often than expected. This lack of ubiquity suggests that there must be trade‐offs, costs, or limitations associated with plasticity. Yet, few costs have been found. We explore one type of limitation, a correlation between plasticity and developmental instability, and use quantitative genetic theory to show why one should expect a genetic correlation. We test that hypothesis using the Landsberg erecta × Cape Verde Islands recombinant inbred lines (RILs) of Arabidopsis thaliana. RILs were grown at four different nitrogen (N) supply levels that span the range of N availabilities previously documented in North American field populations. We found a significant multivariate relationship between the cross‐environment trait plasticity and the within‐environment, within‐RIL developmental instability across 13 traits. This genetic covariation between plasticity and developmental instability has two costs. First, theory predicts diminished fitness for highly plastic lines under stabilizing selection, because their developmental instability and variance around the optimum phenotype will be greater compared to nonplastic genotypes. Second, empirically the most plastic traits exhibited heritabilities reduced by 57% on average compared to nonplastic traits. This demonstration of potential costs in inclusive fitness and heritability provoke a rethinking of the evolutionary role of plasticity.     

The evolution of environmental and genetic sex determination in fluctuating environments

Twenty years ago, Bulmer and Bull suggested that disruptive selection, produced by environmental fluctuations, can result in an evolutionary transition from environmental sex determination (ESD) to genetic sex determination (GSD). We investigated the feasibility of such a process, using mutation-limited adaptive dynamics and individual-based computer simulations. Our model describes the evolution of a reaction norm for sex determination in a metapopulation setting with partial migration and variation in an environmental variable both within and between local patches. The reaction norm represents the probability of becoming a female as a function of environmental state and was modeled as a sigmoid function with two parameters, one giving the location (i.e., the value of the environmental variable for which an individual has equal chance of becoming either sex) and the other giving the slope of the reaction norm for that environment. The slope can be interpreted as being set by the level of developmental noise in morph determination, with less noise giving a steeper slope and a more switchlike reaction norm. We found convergence stable reaction norms with intermediate to large amounts of developmental noise for conditions characterized by low migration rates, small differential competitive advantages between the sexes over environments, and little variation between individual environments within patches compared to variation between patches. We also considered reaction norms with the slope parameter constrained to a high value, corresponding to little developmental noise. For these we found evolutionary branching in the location parameter and a transition from ESD toward GSD, analogous to the original analysis by Bulmer and Bull. Further evolutionary change, including dominance evolution, produced a polymorphism acting as a GSD system with heterogamety. Our results point to the role of developmental noise in the evolution of sex determination.     

Fitness effects of floral plasticity and thermoregulation in a thermally changing environment

Abstract To better understand the evolution of phenotypic plasticity and thermoregulation and their potential value for ectotherms in the face of global warming, we conducted field experiments to measure their effects on fitness and their association with reproductive phenology in Plantago lanceolata in a thermally variable environment. We measured the reproductive timing and success of genotypes varying in thermoregulation, as mediated by floral-reflectance plasticity. Results were consistent with the hypothesis that thermoregulation is more adaptive when thermally variable reproductive seasons are shorter and cooler. Strong thermoregulation/plasticity increased reproductive success during the cool portion of the reproductive season but not during the warm portion. Directional selection that favored strongly thermoregulating genotypes early in the season shifted to stabilizing selection that favored genotypes with weaker thermoregulation later in the season. Thermoregulation and reproductive phenology were negatively correlated. Although reproductive onset and duration were similar between genotypes, strong thermoregulators produced more and larger spikes (clutches) early; weak thermoregulators produced more spikes late. Results suggest that with atmospheric warming, the benefit of raising body temperature via thermoregulation when it is cool should decline in extant populations. The negative correlation between thermoregulation and phenology should accelerate the evolutionary shift toward thermoconformity, that is, reduced plasticity.     

Ontogenetic phenotypic plasticity during the reproductive phase in Arabidopsis thaliana (Brassicaceae)

While phenotypic plasticity has been the focus of much research and debate in the recent ecological and evolutionary literature, the developmental nature of the phenomenon has been mostly overlooked. A developmental perspective must ultimately be an integral part of our understanding of how organisms cope with heterogeneous environments. In this paper I use the rapid cycling Arabidopsis thaliana to address the following questions concerning developmental plasticity. (1) Are there genetic and/or environmental differences in parameters describing ontogenetic trajectories? (2) Is ontogenetic variation produced by differences in genotypes and/or environments for two crucial traits of the reproductive phase of the life cycle, stem elongation and flower production? (3) Is there ontogenetic variability for the correlation between the two characters? I found genetic variation, plasticity, and variation for plasticity affecting at least some of the growth parameters, indicating potential for evolution via heterochronic shifts in ontogenetic trajectories. Within-population differences among families are determined before the onset of the reproductive phase, while among-population variation is the result of divergence during the reproductive phase of the ontogeny. Finally, the ontogenetic profiles of character correlations are very distinct between the ecologically meaningful categories of early- and late-flowering “ecotypes” in this species, and show susceptibility to environmental change.     

Increased socially mediated plasticity in gene expression accompanies rapid adaptive evolution

Recent theory predicts that increased phenotypic plasticity can facilitate adaptation as traits respond to selection. When genetic adaptation alters the social environment, socially mediated plasticity could cause co‐evolutionary feedback dynamics that increase adaptive potential. We tested this by asking whether neural gene expression in a recently arisen, adaptive morph of the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus is more responsive to the social environment than the ancestral morph. Silent males (flatwings) rapidly spread in a Hawaiian population subject to acoustically orienting parasitoids, changing the population's acoustic environment. Experimental altering crickets’ acoustic environments during rearing revealed broad, plastic changes in gene expression. However, flatwing genotypes showed increased socially mediated plasticity, whereas normal‐wing genotypes exhibited negligible expression plasticity. Increased plasticity in flatwing crickets suggests a coevolutionary process coupling socially flexible gene expression with the abrupt spread of flatwing. Our results support predictions that phenotypic plasticity should rapidly evolve to be more pronounced during early phases of adaptation.     

The biology hidden inside residual within‐individual phenotypic variation

Phenotypes vary hierarchically among taxa and populations, among genotypes within populations, among individuals within genotypes, and also within individuals for repeatedly expressed, labile phenotypic traits. This hierarchy produces some fundamental challenges to clearly defining biological phenomena and constructing a consistent explanatory framework. We use a heuristic statistical model to explore two consequences of this hierarchy. First, although the variation existing among individuals within populations has long been of interest to evolutionary biologists, within‐individual variation has been much less emphasized. Within‐individual variance occurs when labile phenotypes (behaviour, physiology, and sometimes morphology) exhibit phenotypic plasticity or deviate from a norm‐of‐reaction within the same individual. A statistical partitioning of phenotypic variance leads us to explore an array of ideas about residual within‐individual variation. We use this approach to draw attention to additional processes that may influence within‐individual phenotypic variance, including interactions among environmental factors, ecological effects on the fitness consequences of plasticity, and various types of adaptive variance. Second, our framework for investigating variation in phenotypic variance reveals that interactions between levels of the hierarchy form the preconditions for the evolution of all types of plasticity, and we extend this idea to the residual level within individuals, where both adaptive plasticity in residuals and canalization‐like processes (stability) can evolve. With the statistical tools now available to examine heterogeneous residual variance, an array of novel questions linking phenotype to environment can be usefully addressed.     

The role of developmental plasticity in evolutionary innovation

Explaining the origins of novel traits is central to evolutionary biology. Longstanding theory suggests that developmental plasticity, the ability of an individual to modify its development in response to environmental conditions, might facilitate the evolution of novel traits. Yet whether and how such developmental flexibility promotes innovations that persist over evolutionary time remains unclear. Here, we examine three distinct ways by which developmental plasticity can promote evolutionary innovation. First, we show how the process of genetic accommodation provides a feasible and possibly common avenue by which environmentally induced phenotypes can become subject to heritable modification. Second, we posit that the developmental underpinnings of plasticity increase the degrees of freedom by which environmental and genetic factors influence ontogeny, thereby diversifying targets for evolutionary processes to act on and increasing opportunities for the construction of novel, functional and potentially adaptive phenotypes. Finally, we examine the developmental genetic architectures of environment-dependent trait expression, and highlight their specific implications for the evolutionary origin of novel traits. We critically review the empirical evidence supporting each of these processes, and propose future experiments and tests that would further illuminate the interplay between environmental factors, condition-dependent development, and the initiation and elaboration of novel phenotypes.     

Developmental Plasticity: Developmental Conversion versus Phenotypic Modulation

The developmental mechanisms by which the environment may alterthe phenotype during development are reviewed. Developmentalplasticity may be of two forms: developmental conversion orphenotypic modulation. In developmental conversion, organismsuse specific environmental cues to activate alternative geneticprograms controlling development. These alternative programsmay either lead to alternative morphs, or may lead to the decisionto activate a developmental arrest. In phenotypic modulation,nonspecific phenotypic variation results from environmentalinfluences on rates or degrees of expression of the developmentalprogram, but the genetic programs controlling development arenot altered. Modulation, which is not necessarily adaptive,is probably the common form of environmentally induced phenotypicvariation in higher organisms, and adaptiveness of phenotypicplasticity therefore cannot be assumed unless specific geneticmechanisms can be demonstrated. The genetic mechanisms by whichdevelopmental plasticity may evolve are reviewed, and the relationshipbetween developmental plasticity and evolutionary plasticityare examined.