Ecological and evolutionary dynamics are intrinsically entwined. On short timescales, ecological interactions determine the fate and impact of new mutants, while on longer timescales evolution shapes the entire community. Here, we study the evolution of large numbers of closely related strains with generalized Lotka Volterra interactions but no niche structure. Host-pathogen-like interactions drive the community into a spatiotemporally chaotic state characterized by continual, spatially-local, blooms and busts. Upon the slow serial introduction of new strains, the community diversifies indefinitely, accommodating an arbitrarily large number of strains in spite of the absence of stabilizing niche interactions. The diversifying phase persists — albeit with gradually slowing diversification — in the presence of general, nonspecific, fitness differences between strains, which break the assumption of tradeoffs inherent in much previous work. Building on a dynamical-mean field-theory analysis of the ecological dynamics, an approximate effective model captures the evolution of the diversity and distributions of key properties. This work establishes a potential scenario for understanding how the interplay between evolution and ecology — in particular coevolution of a bacterial and a generalist phage species — could give rise to the extensive fine-scale diversity that is ubiquitous in the microbial world.
more »
« less
Adaptation limits ecological diversification and promotes ecological tinkering during the competition for substitutable resources
Microbial communities can evade competitive exclusion by diversifying into distinct ecological niches. This spontaneous diversification often occurs amid a backdrop of directional selection on other microbial traits, where competitive exclusion would normally apply. Yet despite their empirical relevance, little is known about how diversification and directional selection combine to determine the ecological and evolutionary dynamics within a community. To address this gap, we introduce a simple, empirically motivated model of eco-evolutionary feedback based on the competition for substitutable resources. Individuals acquire heritable mutations that alter resource uptake rates, either by shifting metabolic effort between resources or by increasing the overall growth rate. While these constitutively beneficial mutations are trivially favored to invade, we show that the accumulated fitness differences can dramatically influence the ecological structure and evolutionary dynamics that emerge within the community. Competition between ecological diversification and ongoing fitness evolution leads to a state of diversification–selection balance, in which the number of extant ecotypes can be pinned below the maximum capacity of the ecosystem, while the ecotype frequencies and genealogies are constantly in flux. Interestingly, we find that fitness differences generate emergent selection pressures to shift metabolic effort toward resources with lower effective competition, even in saturated ecosystems. We argue that similar dynamical features should emerge in a wide range of models with a mixture of directional and diversifying selection.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10077284
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Volume:
- 115
- Issue:
- 44
- ISSN:
- 0027-8424
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. E10407-E10416
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract Despite the well known scale‐dependency of ecological interactions, relatively little attention has been paid to understanding the dynamic interplay between various spatial scales. This is especially notable in metacommunity theory, where births and deaths dominate dynamics within patches (the local scale), and dispersal and environmental stochasticity dominate dynamics between patches (the regional scale). By considering the interplay of local and regional scales in metacommunities, the fundamental processes of community ecology—selection, drift, and dispersal—can be unified into a single theoretical framework. Here, we analyze three related spatial models that build on the classic two‐species Lotka–Volterra competition model. Two open‐system models focus on a single patch coupled to a larger fixed landscape by dispersal. The first is deterministic, while the second adds demographic stochasticity to allow ecological drift. Finally, the third model is a true metacommunity model with dispersal between a large number of local patches, which allows feedback between local and regional scales and captures the well studied metacommunity paradigms as special cases. Unlike previous simulation models, our metacommunity model allows the numerical calculation of equilibria and invasion criteria to precisely determine the outcome of competition at the regional scale. We show that both dispersal and stochasticity can lead to regional outcomes that are different than predicted by the classic Lotka–Volterra competition model. Regional exclusion can occur when the nonspatial model predicts coexistence or founder control, due to ecological drift or asymmetric stochastic switching between basins of attraction, respectively. Regional coexistence can result from local coexistence mechanisms or through competition‐colonization or successional‐niche trade‐offs. Larger dispersal rates are typically competitively advantageous, except in the case of local founder control, which can favor intermediate dispersal rates. Broadly, our models demonstrate the importance of feedback between local and regional scales in competitive metacommunities and provide a unifying framework for understanding how selection, drift, and dispersal jointly shape ecological communities.
-
Studies of eco‐evolutionary dynamics have integrated evolution with ecological processes at multiple scales (populations, communities and ecosystems) and with multiple interspecific interactions (antagonistic, mutualistic and competitive). However, evolution has often been conceptualised as a simple process: short‐term directional adaptation that increases population growth. Here we argue that diverse other evolutionary processes, well studied in population genetics and evolutionary ecology, should also be considered to explore the full spectrum of feedback between ecological and evolutionary processes. Relevant but underappreciated processes include (1) drift and mutation, (2) disruptive selection causing lineage diversification or speciation reversal and (3) evolution driven by relative fitness differences that may decrease population growth. Because eco‐evolutionary dynamics have often been studied by population and community ecologists, it will be important to incorporate a variety of concepts in population genetics and evolutionary ecology to better understand and predict eco‐evolutionary dynamics in nature.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract The tenet that ecological opportunity drives adaptive diversification has been central to theories of speciation since Darwin, yet no widely accepted definition or mechanistic framework for the concept currently exists. We propose a definition for ecological opportunity that provides an explicit mechanism for its action. In our formulation, ecological opportunity refers to environmental conditions that both permit the persistence of a lineage within a community, as well as generate divergent natural selection within that lineage. Thus, ecological opportunity arises from two fundamental elements: (1) niche availability, the ability of a population with a phenotype previously absent from a community to persist within that community and (2) niche discordance, the diversifying selection generated by the adaptive mismatch between a population's niche‐related traits and the newly encountered ecological conditions. Evolutionary response to ecological opportunity is primarily governed by (1) spatiotemporal structure of ecological opportunity, which influences dynamics of selection and development of reproductive isolation and (2) diversification potential, the biological properties of a lineage that determine its capacity to diversify. Diversification under ecological opportunity proceeds as an increase in niche breadth, development of intraspecific ecotypes, speciation, and additional cycles of diversification that may themselves be triggered by speciation. Extensive ecological opportunity may exist in depauperate communities, but it is unclear whether ecological opportunity abates in species‐rich communities. Because ecological opportunity should generally increase during times of rapid and multifarious environmental change, human activities may currently be generating elevated ecological opportunity – but so far little work has directly addressed this topic. Our framework highlights the need for greater synthesis of community ecology and evolutionary biology, unifying the four major components of the concept of ecological opportunity.
-
Beaulieu, Jeremy (Ed.)Abstract Due to their non-motile nature, plants rely heavily on mutualistic interactions to obtain resources and carry out services. One key mutualism is the plant–microbial mutualism in which a plant trades away carbon to a microbial partner for nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous. Plants show much variation in the use of this partnership from the individual level to entire lineages depending upon ecological, evolutionary and environmental context. We sought to determine how this context dependency could result in the promotion, exclusion or coexistence of the microbial mutualism by asking if and when the partnership provided a competitive advantage to the plant. To that end, we created a 2 × 2 evolutionary game in which plants could either be a mutualist and pair with a microbe or be a non-mutualist and forgo the partnership. Our model includes both frequency dependence and density dependence, which gives us the eco-evolutionary dynamics of mutualism evolution. As in all models, mutualism only evolved if it could offer a competitive advantage and its net benefit was positive. However, surprisingly the model reveals the possibility of coexistence between mutualist and non-mutualist genotypes due to competition between mutualists over the microbially obtained nutrient. Specifically, frequency dependence of host strategies can make the microbial symbiont less beneficial if the microbially derived resources are shared, a phenomenon that increasingly reduces the frequency of mutualism as the density of competitors increases. In essence, ecological competition can act as a hindrance to mutualism evolution. We go on to discuss basic experiments that can be done to test and falsify our hypotheses.more » « less
