Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Advances in source–sink theory
- 2 Evolution in source–sink environments: implications for niche conservatism
- 3 Source–sink dynamics emerging from unstable ideal free habitat selection
- 4 Sources and sinks in the evolution and persistence of mutualisms
- 5 Effects of climate change on dynamics and stability of multiregional populations
- 6 Habitat quality, niche breadth, temporal stochasticity, and the persistence of populations in heterogeneous landscapes
- 7 When sinks rescue sources in dynamic environments
- 8 Sinks, sustainability, and conservation incentives
- Part III Progress in source–sink methodology
- Part IV Improvement of source–sink management
- Part V Synthesis
- Index
- References
2 - Evolution in source–sink environments: implications for niche conservatism
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 July 2011
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Advances in source–sink theory
- 2 Evolution in source–sink environments: implications for niche conservatism
- 3 Source–sink dynamics emerging from unstable ideal free habitat selection
- 4 Sources and sinks in the evolution and persistence of mutualisms
- 5 Effects of climate change on dynamics and stability of multiregional populations
- 6 Habitat quality, niche breadth, temporal stochasticity, and the persistence of populations in heterogeneous landscapes
- 7 When sinks rescue sources in dynamic environments
- 8 Sinks, sustainability, and conservation incentives
- Part III Progress in source–sink methodology
- Part IV Improvement of source–sink management
- Part V Synthesis
- Index
- References
Summary
Demographic sources and sinks arise from the interplay of spatial variations in birth and death rates, and movement between habitats. One way to view sources and sinks is that, in the former, individuals are well adapted to the local environment, whereas in the latter, individuals are poorly adapted. This raises the question of how adaptive evolution might influence the evolutionary stability of source–sink population structures. When can a species’ niche evolve, so that a habitat – now a sink – becomes a source? This chapter provides an overview of theoretical investigations into this question. The scenarios considered include the fate of single favorable mutants that improve adaptedness to a sink environment, quantitative genetic variation for single traits determining local fitness, and the influence of reciprocal dispersal from sinks to sources. The overall conclusion across models is that the harsher the sink (as assessed in terms of absolute fitness), the harder it may be for adaptive evolution to sculpt adaptation sufficiently to permit population persistence. Theoretical studies show that the rate of immigration can have a variety of impacts upon evolution in sinks, depending upon many details of genetics, life history, and demography. Such theoretical exercises are not merely academic exercises, because source–sink dynamics naturally arise in a wide range of applied evolutionary contexts (such as the control of agricultural pests, and in disease emergence across host species) where the management aim is to prevent evolution in focal species in particular habitats.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Sources, Sinks and Sustainability , pp. 23 - 57Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011
References
(1976). The nature of limits to natural selection. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 63: 224–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2001). Spatially explicit studies on the ecology and genetics of population margins. In Integrating Ecology and Evolution in a Spatial Context ( and , eds.). Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, UK: 91–116.Google Scholar
, and (1991). Functional responses and heterogeneities: an experimental test with cladocerans. Oikos 60: 69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2001). Adaptation at the edge of a species’ range. In Integrating Ecology and Evolution in a Spatial Context ( and , eds.). Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, UK: 365–392.Google Scholar
and (2005). A reassessment of genetic limits to evolutionary change. Ecology 86: 1371–1384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008). Genetic diversity, adaptive potential, and population viability in changing environments. In Conservation Biology: Evolution in Action ( and , eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK:199–219.Google Scholar
and (2001). Genetic and demographic parameters determining population persistence after a discrete change in the environment. Heredity 8: 313–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Genostasis and the limits to evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B) 333: 289–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2010). Why is adaptation prevented at ecological margins? New insights from individual-based simulations. Ecology Letters 13: 485–494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2006). Modeling the evolutionary and ecological consequences of selection and adaptation in heterogeneous environments. Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution 52: 467–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2008). Allee Effects in Ecology and Conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998). Testing models of source–sink dynamics and balanced dispersal. Oikos 81: 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (1997). Balanced dispersal between spatially varying local populations: an alternative to the source–sink model. American Naturalist 150: 425–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2006). Defining patch contribution in source–sink metapopulations: the importance of including dispersal and its relevance to marine systems. Population Ecology 48: 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1972). Populations in a Seasonal Environment. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
(2010). Evolutionary constraint and ecological consequences. Evolution 64: 1865–1884.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2007). The multifarious effects of dispersal and gene flow on contemporary adaptation. Functional Ecology 21: 434–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1995). When does evolution by natural selection prevent extinction?Evolution 49: 201–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (1999). The effects of density dependence and immigration on local adaptation and niche evolution in a black-hole sink environment. Theoretical Population Biology 55: 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1983). Immigration and the dynamics of peripheral populations. In Advances in Herpetology and Evolutionary Biology ( and , eds.). Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA:680–694.Google Scholar
(1984). Spatial heterogeneity, indirect interactions, and the coexistence of prey species. American Naturalist 124: 377–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1985). Population dynamics in two-patch environments: some anomalous consequences of an optimal habitat distribution. Theoretical Population Biology 28: 181–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996a). Adaptive evolution in source–sink environments: direct and indirect effects of density-dependence on niche evolution. Oikos 75: 182–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996b). Demographic constraints in evolution: towards unifying the evolutionary theories of senescence and niche conservatism. Evolutionary Ecology 10: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1997). On the evolutionary stability of sink populations. Evolutionary Ecology 11: 723–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2003). On the evolutionary ecology of species ranges. Evolutionary Ecology Research 5: 159–178.Google Scholar
(2009). Bringing the Hutchinsonian niche into the 21st century: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 106: 19659–19665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2008). Habitat selection and niche conservatism. Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution 54: 295–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and and (2011). Theoretical perspectives on the statics and dynamics of species’ ranges. American Naturalist 177: in press.Google Scholar
and (1992). Analysis of adaptation in heterogeneous landscapes: implications for the evolution of fundamental niches. Evolutionary Ecology 6: 433–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997a). How does immigration influence local adaptation? A reexamination of a familiar paradigm. American Naturalist 149: 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997b). The evolution of species’ niches: a population dynamic perspective. In Case Studies in Mathematical Modelling: Ecology, Physiology, and Cell Biology (, , and , eds.). Prentice-Hall, Englewood, NJ: 25–50.Google Scholar
and (2004). Conservation implications of niche conservatism and evolution in heterogeneous environments. InEvolutionary Conservation Biology (, and, eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK: 244–264.Google Scholar
, and (2003). The phenomenology of niche evolution via quantitative traits in a “black-hole” sink. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 270: 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004a). Temporal variation can facilitate niche evolution in harsh sink environments. American Naturalist 164: 187–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2004b). Allee effects, immigration, and the evolution of species’ niches. American Naturalist 163: 253–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2005). Theories of niche conservatism and evolution: could exotic species be potential tests? In Species Invasions: Insights into Ecology, Evolution, and Biogeography (, and , eds.). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA:259–290.Google Scholar
(1957). Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 22: 415–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1995). Demography of source–sink populations and the evolution of ecological niches. Evolutionary Ecology 9: 38–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2000). Adaptation to marginal habitats: contrasting influence of dispersal on the fate of rare alleles with small and large effects. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 267: 1315–1320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2003). Sex-biased dispersal and adaptation to marginal habitats. American Naturalist 162: 415–426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2004). Ecological and evolutionary consequences of source–sink population dynamics. In Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution of Metapopulations ( and , eds.). Elsevier Academic Press, Burlington, MA: 387–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008). Adaptation to marginal habitats. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 39: 321–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2002). Evolutionary consequences of asymmetric dispersal rates. American Naturalist 160: 333–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (1997). Mutational collapse of fitness in marginal habitats and the evolution of ecological specialization. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 10: 407–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1981). Experimental demography of the sand-dune annual, Cakile edentula, growing along an environmental gradient in Nova Scotia. Journal of Ecology 69: 615–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1982). Population ecology on an environmental gradient: Cakile edentula on a sand dune. Oecologia 52: 348–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1953). The size of water masses containing plankton blooms. Journal of Marine Research 12: 141–147.Google Scholar
and (1997). Evolution of a species’ range. American Naturalist 150: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2002). Gene flow and the limits to natural selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1976). Spatial patterning and the structure of ecological communities. Lectures in Mathematics in the Life Sciences 8: 1–35.Google Scholar
and (1999). Adaptation versus migration in demographically unstable populations. Journal of Mathematical Biology 38: 571–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2004). Reciprocating dispersal by habitat-selecting white-footed mice. Oikos 107: 549–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2008). Population extinction and the genetics of adaptation. American Naturalist 172: 160–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2007). Source–sink dynamics shape the evolution of antibiotic resistance and its pleiotropic fitness cost. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 274: 2351–2356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2009). Species range: adaptation in space and time. American Naturalist 174: E186–E204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2002). Niche shifts and expansion due to sexual selection. Evolutionary Ecology Research 4: 351–369.Google Scholar
(1988). Sources, sinks, and population regulation. American Naturalist 132: 652–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2000). On the relationship between niche and distribution. Ecology Letters 3: 349–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2001). When sources become sinks: migrational meltdown in heterogeneous habitats. Evolution 55: 1520–1531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2006). The role of local populations within a landscape context: defining and classifying sources and sinks. American Naturalist 167: 925–938.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2009). Evolution and ecology of species range limits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 40: 415–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2001). Effects of releasing maladapted individuals: a demographic-evolutionary model. American Naturalist 158: 331–340.Google ScholarPubMed
and (2010). Why do species have a skin? Investigating mutational constraint with a fundamental population model. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 101: 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1995). Sources, sinks and pseudo-sinks. Journal of Animal Ecology 64: 126–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2005). Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology, and conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36: 519–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , , , , , , , , , and (2010). Niche conservatism as an emerging principle in ecology and conservation biology. Ecology Letters 13: 1310–1324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2006). Limits to the adaptive potential of small populations. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37: 433–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1992). Positive-feedback switches in plant communities. Advances in Ecological Research 23: 263–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8
- Cited by