How Does Joint Evolution of Consumer Traits Affect Resource Specialization?

Scale-dependent effects of niche specialisation: The disconnect between individual and species ranges

One of the most general expectations of species range dynamics is that widespread species tend to have broader niches. However, it remains unclear how this relationship is expressed at different levels of biological organisation, which involve potentially distinctive processes operating at different spatial and temporal scales. Here, we show that range sizes of terrestrial non-volant mammals at the individual and species level show contrasting relationships with two ecological niche dimensions: diet and habitat breadth. While average individual home range size appears to be mainly shaped by the interplay of diet niche breadth and body mass, species geographical range size is primarily related to habitat niche breadth but not to diet niche breadth. Our findings suggest that individual home range size is shaped by the trade-off between energetic requirements, movement capacity and trophic specialisation, whereas species geographical range size is related to the ability to persist under various environmental conditions.

Consequences of combining sex-specific traits

Males and females follow distinct life-history strategies that have co-evolved with several sex-specific traits. Higher investment into parental investment (PI) demands an increased lifespan. Thus, resource allocation toward an efficient immune system is mandatory. In contrast, resources allocated toward secondary sexual signals (ornamentation) may negatively correlate with investment into immunity and ultimately result in a shorter lifespan. Previous studies have addressed how resource allocation toward single sex-specific traits impacts lifetime reproductive success (LRS). However, the trade-offs between diverse sex-specific characteristics and their impact on LRS remain largely unassessed impeding our understanding of life-history evolution. We have designed a theoretical framework (informed by experimental data and evolutionary genetics) that explores the effects of multiple sex-specific traits and assessed how they influence LRS. From the individual sex-specific traits, we inferred the consequences at the population level by evaluating adult sex ratios (ASR). Our theory implies that sex-specific resource allocation toward the assessed traits resulted in a biased ASR. Our model focuses on the impact of PI, ornamentation, and immunity as causal to biased ASR. The framework developed herein can be employed to understand the combined impact of diverse sex-specific traits on the LRS and the eventual population dynamics of particular model systems.

Sexual dimorphism driven by intersexual resource competition: Why is it rare, and where to look for it?

Sexes often differ more obviously in secondary sexual characteristics than in traits that appear naturally selected, despite conceivable benefits to intersexual niche partitioning. Genetic constraints may play a role in limiting sex‐specific niche evolution; however, it is not clear why this limit should apply to naturally selected traits more than those under sexual selection; the latter routinely produces dimorphism. We ask whether ecological factors and/or features of the mating system limit dimorphism in resource use, or conversely, what conditions are the most permissible ones for sexual niche differences.

The scale of mating competition and spatial variation in resource availability can help predict sexually dimorphic niches or the lack thereof. We investigate why and when dimorphism might fail to evolve even if genetic covariation between the sexes posed no constraint.

Our analytical model incorporates the first aspect of spatial interactions (scale of mating competition). It is followed by simulations that explore broader conditions, including multiple resources with habitat heterogeneity, genetic correlations and non‐Gaussian resource‐use efficiency functions.

We recover earlier known conditions for favourable conditions for the evolution of niche partitioning between sexes, such as narrow individual niche and low degrees of genetic constraint. We also show spatial considerations to alter this picture. Sexual niche divergence occurs more readily when local mating groups are small and different resources occur reliably across habitats. Polygyny (medium‐sized or large mating groups) can diminish the prospects for dimorphism even if no genetic constraints are present. Habitat heterogeneity typically also disfavours niche dimorphism but can also lead to polymorphism within a sex, if it is beneficial to specialize to be very competitive in one habitat, even at a cost to performance in the other.

Sexual conflict is usually used to explain dimorphic traits or behaviours. Our models highlight that introducing conflict (achieved by switching from monogamy to polygamy) can also be responsible for sexual monomorphism. Under monogamy, males benefit from specializing to consume other resources than what feeds the female best. Polygyny makes males disregard this female benefit, and both sexes compete for the most profitable resource, leading to overlapping niches.

Asymmetric Evolvability Leads to Specialization without Trade-Offs

AbstractMany organisms are specialized, and these narrow niches are often explained with trade-offs-the inability for one organism to express maximal performance in two or more environments. However, evidence is lacking that trade-offs are sufficient to explain specialists. Several lines of theoretical inquiry suggest that populations can specialize without explicit trade-offs, as a result of relaxed selection in generalists for their performance in rare environments. Here, I synthesize and extend these approaches, showing that emergent asymmetries in evolvability can push a population toward specialization in the absence of trade-offs and in the presence of substantial ecological costs of specialism. Simulations are used to demonstrate how adaptation to a more common environment interferes with adaptation to a less common but otherwise equal alternative environment and that this interference is greatly exacerbated at low recombination rates. This adaptive process of specialization can effectively trap populations in a suboptimal niche. These modeling results predict that transient differences in evolvability across traits during a single episode of adaptation could have long-term consequences for a population's niche.

How community adaptation affects biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships

Evidence is growing that evolutionary dynamics can impact biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) relationships. However the nature of such impacts remains poorly understood. Here we use a modelling approach to compare random communities, with no trait evolutionary fine-tuning, and co-adapted communities, where traits have co-evolved, in terms of emerging biodiversity-productivity, biodiversity-stability and biodiversity-invasion relationships. Community adaptation impacted most BEF relationships, sometimes inverting the slope of the relationship compared to random communities. Biodiversity-productivity relationships were generally less positive among co-adapted communities, with reduced contribution of sampling effects. The effect of community-adaptation, though modest regarding invasion resistance, was striking regarding invasion tolerance: co-adapted communities could remain very tolerant to invasions even at high diversity. BEF relationships are thus contingent on the history of ecosystems and their degree of community adaptation. Short-term experiments and observations following recent changes may not be safely extrapolated into the future, once eco-evolutionary feedbacks have taken place.

An Effective Mutualism? The Role of Theoretical Studies in Ecology and Evolution

Theoretical models often have fundamentally different goals than do empirical studies of the same topic. Models can test the logic of existing hypotheses, explore the plausibility of new hypotheses, provide expectations that can be tested with data, and address aspects of topics that are currently inaccessible empirically. Theoretical models are common in ecology and evolution and are generally well cited, but I show that many citations appearing in nontheoretical studies are general to topic and that a substantial proportion are incorrect. One potential cause of this pattern is that some functions of models are rather abstract, leading to miscommunication between theoreticians and empiricists. Such misunderstandings are often triggered by simplifying logistical assumptions that modelers make. The 2018 Vice Presidential Symposium of the American Society of Naturalists included a variety of mathematical models in ecology and evolution from across several topics. Common threads that appear in the use of the models are identified, highlighting the power of a theoretical approach and the role of the assumptions that such models make.