Jump to content

Local adaptation: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Reverted 1 good faith edit by 24.182.61.88 using STiki
Undid revision 688044385 by Materialscientist (talk) - the definition that was previously given was incorrect
Line 1: Line 1:
{{context|date=November 2014}}
{{context|date=November 2014}}
A population is said to be locally adapted<ref>{{cite book|last1=Williams|first1=George|title=Adaptation and Natural Selection|date=1966|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton}}</ref> if organisms in that population have differentially evolved as compared to other populations within their species in response to selective pressures imposed by some aspect of their local environment, be that aspect biotic or abiotic<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leimu|first1=Roosa|title=A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants|journal=PLoS ONE|date=December 23, 2008|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|url=http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010}}</ref>. Therefore '''Local adaptation''' is simply when a population of organisms has evolved to be more well-suited to its environment than other members of the same species. Local adaptation is often determined via reciprocal transplant experiments, where organisms from one population are transplanted into another population, and vice versa, and their fitnesses measured<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kawecki|first1=Tadeusz|title=Conceptual issues in local adaptation|journal=Ecology Letters|date=2004|doi=10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x|url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x/full#b165}}</ref>. If the transplanted organisms have lower fitness in the novel environment, than the native population can be said to be locally adapted.
'''Local adaptation''' is the evolution of one species in response to recent evolutionary changes in an other species. It results from the interactions among evolutionary forces ([[Selection (biology)|selection]], [[genetic drift]], [[mutation]], [[Animal migration|migration]])<ref>Blanquart F., Kaltz O., Nuismer S.L., Gandon S. 2013. [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12150/abstract A practical guide to measuring local adaptation ]. Ecology letters, 16 : 1195-1205</ref> and is observable on a human timescale.<ref>Thompson J. N. 2005. The geographic mosaic of coevolution. University of Chicago Press. Chap 5, 72-73</ref> The [[evolution]] of [[species]] in spatially and temporarily heterogeneous environments generates different selective pressures.<ref>Gandon S., Michalakis Y. 2002. [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1420-9101.2002.00402.x/abstract Local adaptation, evolutionary potential and host–parasite co-evolution: interactions between migration, mutation, population size and generation time]. J. EVOL. BIOL. 15, 451–462</ref> That is why co-adaptation between competitors ([[parasitism]], predation) and [[mutualists]] is constant, selecting or maintaining the frequency of [[Phenotypic trait|traits]] acting in survival and/or reproduction.<ref>Taylor E. B. 1991. [http://www.nativefishsociety.org/conservation/wild_population/annotated_bib_salmonids_hatcheries/fitness/LocalAdapt.pdf A review of local adaptation in Salmonidae, with particular reference to Pacific and Atlantic salmon]. Aquaculture, 98: 185-207</ref> This dynamic process favors local [[coevolution]] and specialization of the participants in the interaction. Local adaptation can be effected both on a large geographic scale (between populations of one species separated by hundreds kilometers), microgeographically (less than 1 kilometer) and even seasonally.


Populations located in different environments may be faced with different biotic and abiotic pressures<ref>{{cite book|last1=Thompson|first1=John|title=The geographic mosaic of coevolution|date=2005|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|isbn=9780226797625}}</ref>, consequently natural selection may drive the evolution of these populations in different directions. This divergent natural selection can lead to differences in trait values among populations for those traits that are heritable and impact organism fitness<ref>{{cite book|last1=Endler|first1=John|title=Natural selection in the wild|date=1986|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton|isbn=978-0691083872}}</ref>. Local adaptation of a variety of traits has been demonstrated in numerous, phylogenetically disparate organisms.
Modification in selective pressures can facilitate adaptation by increasing local genetic variation. Those modifications are often found in the context of antagonistic interactions, where co-evolution is fast and results in an ‘arms race’ in which organisms constantly adapt, evolve and survive against each other-evolving opposing organisms. In such interactions, the one evolving the most rapidly, having a shorter [[generation time]] or higher mutation or migration rate, is locally adapted while the other is not.<ref>that evolve the most rapidly, thanks to a shorter generation time or higher mutation or migration rate, is locally adapted</ref> Local adaptation can be evaluated by comparing [[fitness (biology)|fitness]] of the interacting agents in close geographical areas and in isolated areas.<ref>Kaltz O., Skykoff J. 1998. [http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v81/n4/full/6884350a.html Local adaptation in host-parasite systems]. Heredity. 81: 361-370</ref>


Examples of local adaptation abound in the natural world. For instance, many plant populations exhibit local adaptation<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leimu|first1=Roosa|title=A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants|journal=PLoS ONE|date=December 23, 2008|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010|url=http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0004010}}</ref>. <ref>{{cite journal|last1=Elizabeth|first1=Leger|title=Genetic variation and local adaptation at a cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) invasion edge in western Nevada|journal=Molecular Ecology|date=2009|volume=18|issue=21|pages=4366-4379}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Joshi|first1=J|title=Local adaptation enhances performance of common plant species|journal=Ecology Letters|date=2001|doi=10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00262.x}}</ref>. This has been established by reciprocally transplanting plants from one population into another population, and vice versa. The transplanted plants often do worse in the novel environment, than their conspecifics that are locally adapted. Many examples of local adaptation exist in host-parasite systems as well. For instance, a host may be resistant to a locally-abundant pathogen or parasite, but conspecific hosts from elsewhere where that pathogen is not abundant may have no evolved no such adaptation<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kaltz|first1=O|last2=Shykoff|first2=JA|title=Local adaptation in host-parasite systems|journal=Heredity|date=1998|volume=81|issue=4|pages=361-370|doi=0.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00435.x}}</ref>.
== Examples ==

* In the lakes of New Zealand, ''[[Microphallus]] sp.'' [[trematodes]] are more adapted to ''[[Potamopyrgus antipodarum]]'' snails with sexual reproduction from shallow-water area than to deeper-water snails with asexual reproduction.<ref>King K. C., Delph L. F., Jokela J., Lively C. M. 2011. [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2011.19241.x/abstract Coevolutionary hotspots and coldspots for host sex and parasite local adaptation in a snail-trematode interaction]. Oikos ; 120(9) :1335-1340</ref>

* Local adaptation can be made by ''[[Daphnia magna]]'' under environmental stressors by changing their [[phototactic]] (response to light) behavior and their life-history traits (body and eggs size, brood size).<ref>Boersma M., De Meester L., Spaak P. 1999. [http://www.aslo.org/lo/toc/vol_44/issue_2/0393.html Environmental stress and local adaptation in Daphnia magna]. Limnol. Oceanogr., 44(2), 393-402.</ref>

* [[Soil fertility]] is a key driver of local adaptation in ''[[Arbuscular mycorrhizal]]'' (AM) symbioses. Locally adapted [[mycorrhizal]] associations are more mutualistic at sites with limited [[phosphorus]] and less parasitic at sites with limited [[nitrogen]], depending on the plant, soil and [[fungi]] combination.<ref>Johnson N. J., Wilson G. W. T., Bowker M. A., Wilson J. A., Miller M. R. 2009. [http://www.pnas.org/content/107/5/2093.full.pdf Resource limitation is a driver of local adaptation in mycorrhizal symbioses]. PNAS. Vol. 107, No. 5, 2093-2098.</ref>


== See also ==
== See also ==

Revision as of 06:33, 7 December 2015

A population is said to be locally adapted[1] if organisms in that population have differentially evolved as compared to other populations within their species in response to selective pressures imposed by some aspect of their local environment, be that aspect biotic or abiotic[2]. Therefore Local adaptation is simply when a population of organisms has evolved to be more well-suited to its environment than other members of the same species. Local adaptation is often determined via reciprocal transplant experiments, where organisms from one population are transplanted into another population, and vice versa, and their fitnesses measured[3]. If the transplanted organisms have lower fitness in the novel environment, than the native population can be said to be locally adapted.

Populations located in different environments may be faced with different biotic and abiotic pressures[4], consequently natural selection may drive the evolution of these populations in different directions. This divergent natural selection can lead to differences in trait values among populations for those traits that are heritable and impact organism fitness[5]. Local adaptation of a variety of traits has been demonstrated in numerous, phylogenetically disparate organisms.

Examples of local adaptation abound in the natural world. For instance, many plant populations exhibit local adaptation[6]. [7][8]. This has been established by reciprocally transplanting plants from one population into another population, and vice versa. The transplanted plants often do worse in the novel environment, than their conspecifics that are locally adapted. Many examples of local adaptation exist in host-parasite systems as well. For instance, a host may be resistant to a locally-abundant pathogen or parasite, but conspecific hosts from elsewhere where that pathogen is not abundant may have no evolved no such adaptation[9].

See also

3

References

  1. ^ Williams, George (1966). Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  2. ^ Leimu, Roosa (December 23, 2008). "A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants". PLoS ONE. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004010.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  3. ^ Kawecki, Tadeusz (2004). "Conceptual issues in local adaptation". Ecology Letters. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x.
  4. ^ Thompson, John (2005). The geographic mosaic of coevolution. The University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226797625.
  5. ^ Endler, John (1986). Natural selection in the wild. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691083872.
  6. ^ Leimu, Roosa (December 23, 2008). "A meta-analysis of local adaptation in plants". PLoS ONE. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004010.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  7. ^ Elizabeth, Leger (2009). "Genetic variation and local adaptation at a cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) invasion edge in western Nevada". Molecular Ecology. 18 (21): 4366–4379.
  8. ^ Joshi, J (2001). "Local adaptation enhances performance of common plant species". Ecology Letters. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00262.x.
  9. ^ Kaltz, O; Shykoff, JA (1998). "Local adaptation in host-parasite systems". Heredity. 81 (4): 361–370. doi:0.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00435.x. {{cite journal}}: Check |doi= value (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_adaptation&oldid=694122630"