The evolution of habitat construction with and without phenotypic plasticity

Adaptive responses to habitat change: Theory and tests with field experiments

Habitat loss and change are often implicated as the primary causes of species extinction. Although any population can be instantly imperiled by catastrophe, most habitat loss occurs gradually, thus enabling affected individuals an adaptive advantage to occupy the best of their dwindling opportunities. I demonstrate how to infer the advantage between two habitats for any density and frequency-dependent strategy of habitat selection. I explore the concept of an Adaptive Dispersal Strategy Landscape to reveal the Evolutionarily Stable Strategy separately for ideal-free and ideal preemptive habitat selectors. Both solutions reveal an initially counterintuitive expectation that individuals living at high density gain insufficient adaptive advantage to disperse from a deteriorating habitat. Adaptive dispersal is constrained at high density because habitats of better quality are fully occupied. I test the theory with measures of movement and foraging in crossover experiments on a seminatural population of meadow voles. The experiment allowed the voles to choose among patches and between enclosures in which I differentially manipulated food and shelter. Although photographs from an infrared camera documented voles venturing from one habitat to the other, none became resident. Voles preferentially foraged in the richer of the two enclosures, even when I reversed treatments, and they foraged more in patches protected by mulched straw. The adaptive advantage of dispersal using a surrogate fitness proxy based on the voles' giving-up densities mirrored that generated by theory. The convergence between theory and experiment yields much-needed insight into our ability to test, predict, and hopefully resolve, the ecological, evolutionary, and conservation consequences of habitat loss.

Evolutionary rescue via niche construction: Infrequent construction can prevent post-invasion extinction

A population experiencing habitat loss can avoid extinction by undergoing genetic adaptation-a process known as evolutionary rescue. Here we analytically approximate the probability of evolutionary rescue via a niche-constructing mutation that allows carriers to convert a novel, unfavorable reproductive habitat to a favorable state at a cost to their fecundity. We analyze competition between mutants and non-niche-constructing wild types, who ultimately require the constructed habitats to reproduce. We find that over-exploitation of the constructed habitats by wild types can generate damped oscillations in population size shortly after mutant invasion, thereby decreasing the probability of rescue. Such post-invasion extinction is less probable when construction is infrequent, habitat loss is common, the reproductive environment is large, or the population's carrying capacity is small. Under these conditions, wild types are less likely to encounter the constructed habitats and, consequently, mutants are more likely to fix. These results suggest that, without a mechanism that deters wild type inheritance of the constructed habitats, a population undergoing rescue via niche construction may remain prone to short-timescale extinction despite successful mutant invasion.

Niche theory for positive plant-soil feedbacks

Interactions between plants and the soil are an important ecological process in terrestrial ecosystems as they affect plant community structure: when and where we find different plant species. Those interactions are typically thought of as one-directional: local soil conditions filter through dispersing species to produce a community of locally adapted plants. However, plants can modify local physicochemical soil conditions via their roots and associations with soil microbes. These may in turn affect the local fitness of other plants, making plant-soil interactions bidirectional. In order to understand how they differ from other ecological processes that structure plant communities, we need a theory connecting these individual-level plant-soil feedbacks to community-level patterns. Here, we build this theory with a mathematical model of plant community dynamics in which soil conditioning is explicitly modeled over time and depends on the density of the plants. We analyze this model to describe the long-term composition and spatial distribution of the plant community. Our main result is that positive plant-soil feedbacks will create clustering of species with similar soil preferences. The composition of these clusters is further influenced by niche width and conditioning strength. In contrast with competitive dynamics driven by niche overlap, only species belonging to the same cluster can maintain high relative abundance in the community. Spatial heterogeneity in the form of an environmental gradient generates patches, each representing a single cluster. However, such patchiness is disfavored when species differ in dispersal ability. We show that stronger dispersers cannot take over the habitat as long as an exogenous driver favors soil conditions that benefit the other species. If exogenous drivers supersede soil conditioning by plants, we retrieve classic habitat filtering, where species are selected based on their suitability to the local environment. Overall, we provide a novel mathematical model for positive plant-soil feedback that we use to describe the spatial patterns of plant abundance and traits related to soil preference and conditioning ability.

The factors that favor adaptive habitat construction versus non-adaptive environmental conditioning

Adaptive habitat construction is a process by which individuals alter their environment so as to increase their (inclusive) fitness. Such alterations are a subset of the myriad ways that individuals condition their environment. We present an individual-based model of habitat construction to explore what factors might favor selection when the benefits of environmental alterations are shared by individuals of the same species. Our results confirm the predictions of inclusive fitness and group selection theory and expectations based on previous models that construction will be more favored when its benefits are more likely to be directed to self or near kin. We found that temporal variation had no effect on the evolution of construction. For spatial heterogeneity, construction was disfavored when the spatial pattern of movement did not match the spatial pattern of environmental heterogeneity, especially when there was spatial heterogeneity in the optimal amount of construction. Under those conditions, very strong selection was necessary to favor genetic differentiation of construction propensity among demes. We put forth a constitutive theory for the evolution of adaptive habitat construction that unifies our model with previous verbal and quantitative models into a formal conceptual framework.

Do I build or do I move? Adaptation by habitat construction versus habitat choice

Trait adaptation to a heterogeneous environment can occur through six modes: genetic differentiation of those traits, a jack-of-all-trades phenotypic uniformity, diversified bet-hedging, phenotypic plasticity, habitat choice, and habitat construction. A key question is what circumstances favor one mode over another, and how they might interact if a system can express more than one mode at a time. We examined the joint evolution of habitat choice and habitat construction using individual-based simulations. We manipulated when during the life cycle construction occurred and the fitness value of construction. We found that for our model habitat construction was nearly always favored over habitat choice, especially if construction happened after dispersal. Because of the ways that the various modes of adaptation interact with each other, there is no simple answer as to which will be favored; it depends on details of the biology and ecology of a given system.

Digest: Changing environment often easier than changing phenotype

What strategy should an individual follow when faced with a suboptimal environment: change the environment, adapt to the environment, or both? Scheiner et al. used an individual-based model to address the interaction of plasticity and habitat construction with different life histories in a heterogeneous environment. In most situations, habitat construction was superior to either plasticity or a mixed strategy, but not always, and specific conditions may favor plasticity.