Abstract Evolutionary adaptation can allow a population to persist in the face of a new environmental challenge. With many populations now threatened by environmental change, it is important to understand whether this process of evolutionary rescue is feasible under natural conditions, yet work on this topic has been largely theoretical. We used unique long-term data to parameterize deterministic and stochastic models of the contribution of 1 trait to evolutionary rescue using field estimates for the subalpine plant Ipomopsis aggregata and hybrids with its close relative I. tenuituba. In the absence of evolution or plasticity, the 2 studied populations are projected to go locally extinct due to earlier snowmelt under climate change, which imposes drought conditions. Phenotypic selection on specific leaf area (SLA) was estimated in 12 years and multiple populations. Those data on selection and its environmental sensitivity to annual snowmelt timing in the spring were combined with previous data on heritability of the trait, phenotypic plasticity of the trait, and the impact of snowmelt timing on mean absolute fitness. Selection favored low values of SLA (thicker leaves). The evolutionary response to selection on that single trait was insufficient to allow evolutionary rescue by itself, but in combination with phenotypic plasticity it promoted evolutionary rescue in 1 of the 2 populations. The number of years until population size would stop declining and begin to rise again was heavily dependent upon stochastic environmental changes in snowmelt timing around the trend line. Our study illustrates how field estimates of quantitative genetic parameters can be used to predict the likelihood of evolutionary rescue. Although a complete set of parameter estimates are generally unavailable, it may also be possible to predict the general likelihood of evolutionary rescue based on published ranges for phenotypic selection and heritability and the extent to which early snowmelt impacts fitness.
more »
« less
Data for: Predicting the contribution of single trait evolution to rescuing a plant population from demographic impacts of climate change
{"Abstract":["Evolutionary adaptation can allow a population to persist in the face of a\n new environmental challenge. With many populations now threatened by\n environmental change, it is important to understand whether this process\n of evolutionary rescue is feasible under natural conditions, yet work on\n this topic has been largely theoretical. We used unique long-term data to\n parameterize deterministic and stochastic models of the contribution of\n one trait to evolutionary rescue using field estimates for the subalpine\n plant Ipomopsis aggregata and hybrids with its close relative I.\n tenuituba. In the absence of evolution or plasticity, the two studied\n populations are projected to go locally extinct due to earlier snowmelt\n under climate change, which imposes drought conditions. Phenotypic\n selection on specific leaf area (SLA) was estimated in 12 years and\n multiple populations. Those data on selection and its environmental\n sensitivity to annual snowmelt timing in the spring were combined with\n previous data on heritability of the trait, phenotypic plasticity of the\n trait, and the impact of snowmelt timing on mean absolute fitness.\n Selection favored low values of SLA (thicker leaves). The evolutionary\n response to selection on that single trait was insufficient to allow\n evolutionary rescue by itself, but in combination with phenotypic\n plasticity it promoted evolutionary rescue in one of the two populations.\n The number of years until population size would stop declining and begin\n to rise again was heavily dependent upon stochastic environmental changes\n in snowmelt timing around the trend line. Our study illustrates how field\n estimates of quantitative genetic parameters can be used to predict the\n likelihood of evolutionary rescue. Although a complete set of parameter\n estimates are generally unavailable, it may also be possible to predict\n the general likelihood of evolutionary rescue based on published ranges\n for phenotypic selection and heritability and the extent to which early\n snowmelt impacts fitness."],"Methods":["The study sites consisted of three “Poverty Gulch” sites in\n Gunnsion National Forest and one site “Vera Falls” at the Rocky Mountain\n Biological Laboratory, all in Gunnison County, CO, USA. Focal plants\n included two sets of plants. One set (data from 2009-2019) consisted of\n plants in common gardens at three sites: an I. aggregata\n site (hereafter “agg”), an I. tenuituba\n site (hereafter “ten”) and a site at the center of the natural\n hybrid zone (hereafter “hyb”). The second set consisted of plants growing\n in situ at two of the same Poverty Gulch sites (“agg” and “hyb”), and\n an I. aggregata site at Vera Falls (hereafter “VF”;\n data from 2017-2023). The common gardens were started\n from seed in 2007 and 2008. Measurements of SLA in these gardens began\n when plants were 2 years old, either 2009 or 2010 depending upon the\n garden, as they are only small seedlings during their first summer after\n seed maturation. By 2018, all but 15 of the 4512 plants originally planted\n had died, with or without blooming, and we stopped following these\n gardens. Starting in 2017, in situ vegetative plants at the I.\n aggregata site and the hybrid site whose longest leaf exceeded\n 25 mm were marked with metal tags to facilitate\n identification. In each year of the study, one leaf\n from each vegetative plant was collected in the field and transported on\n ice to the RMBL, 8 km distant. There each leaf was scanned with a flatbed\n scanner and analyzed using ImageJ to measure leaf area. The leaf was dried\n at 70 deg C for 2 hours and then weighed to obtain dry mass and calculate\n SLA as area/dry mass. For plants in the common gardens, SLA was measured\n on 982 leaves from 383 plants in 2009 – 2014. For in situ plants, SLA was\n measured on one leaf from each of 877 plants in 2017 – 2022. Fitness was\n estimated as the binary variable of survival to flowering. Plants that\n were still alive in 2019 in the common gardens or in 2023 at the end of\n the study were assumed to survive to flowering. These\n data were used to estimate selection differentials on SLA in each of 12\n years. We then combined this information with previous information on\n heritability and the effect of snowmelt date in the spring on mean\n absolute fitness, measured as the finite rate of population increase, from\n a previous demographic study. This information was used to parameterize\n models of evolutionary rescue that we developed. We developed two models\n that differed in how snowmelt timing changed: a Step-change model and a\n Gradual environmental change model and analyzed both deterministic and\n stochastic versions. All analysis and modeling was done in R ver\n 4.2.2. "],"TechnicalInfo":["# Data for: Predicting the contribution of single trait evolution to\n rescuing a plant population from demographic impacts of climate change\n Dataset DOI: [10.5061/dryad.ht76hdrtn](10.5061/dryad.ht76hdrtn) ##\n Description of the data and file structure File\n "mastervegtraitsSLA2023.csv" contains data on specific leaf area\n for Ipomopsis plants in the field. Files\n "masterdemography_insitu_2023.csv" and\n "masterdemography_commongarden.csv" provide the corresponding\n information on survival to flowering. File "snowmelt.csv"\n provides dates of snowmelt in the spring. File\n "selection_vs_snowmelt.csv" provides intermediate results on\n selection intensities from analysis with the first parts of the code\n "Campbell-EvolutionLettersMay2025.Rmd". File\n "IPMresults.csv" provides estimates of the finite rate of\n increase (lambda) predicted from the publication by Campbell\n [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820096116](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820096116) File "Campbell-EvolutionLettersMay2025.Rmd" provides the R code for statistical analysis and the deterministic and stochastic models of evolutionary rescue. All data analysis and modeling was done in R ver. 4.4.2 on a Windows machine. All necessary input data files are provided. The R code is annotated to indicate which portions produce analyses and figures in the manuscript. For the multipart figures 6-9 the code needs to be manually updated to produce each part of the figure before assembling them. In those cases, each part represents a model with a unique set of parameters. ### Files and variables #### File: Data\\_files\\_for\\_EVL\\_Campbell\\_2025.zip **Description:** All data files Blank cells are indicated by "." except in "selection_vs_snowmelt.csv" where they are indicated by "NA" **File:** mastervegtraitsSLA2023.csv * meltday = first day of bare ground at the Rocky Mountain Biological Lab (RMBL) in units of days starting with January 1 * year = year * site = site. agg = site with I. aggregata. hyb = site with natural hybrids. ten = site with I. tenuituba. VF = Vera Falls site containing I. aggregata. * idtag = metal tag used to identify plant * planttype = type of plant. AA = progeny of I. aggregata x I. aggregata. AT = progeny of I. aggregata x I. tenuituba. TA = progeny of I. tenuituba x I. aggregata. TT = progeny of I. tenuituba x I. tenuituba. F2 = progeny of F1 (either AT or TA) x F1. agg = natural I. aggregata. hyb = natural hybrid. * sla = specific leaf area in units of cm2/g * uniqueid = an id used to identify the plant uniquely across all years and sites **File:** masterdemography\\_insitu\\_2023.csv * site = site. agg = site with I. aggregata. hyb = site with hybrids. VF = Vera Falls site containing I. aggregata. * idtag = metal tag used to identify plant * yeartagged = year the plant was first tagged * flrlabelxx = label for plants flowering in year 20xx * stagexxxx = stage in year xxxx. 0 = dead. 1 = single vegetative rosette. 2 = single inflorescence. 3 = multiple vegetative rosette. 4 = multiple inflorescence. * lengthxx = length of longest leaf in year 20xx in mm * leavesxx = number of leaves in rosette(s) in year 20xx **File:** masterdemography_commongarden.csv * site = site. agg = site with I. aggregata. hyb = site with natural hybrids. ten = site with I. tenuituba. * IDTAG = metal tag used to identify plant * Planttype = type of plant. AA = progeny of I. aggregata x I. aggregata. AT = progeny of I. aggregata x I. tenuituba. TA = progeny of I. tenuituba x I. aggregata. TT = progeny of I. tenuituba x I. tenuituba. F2full = full-sib progeny of F1 (either AT or TA) x F1. F2non = non full-sib progeny of F1 x F1. * stagexx = stage of plant in year 20xx. 0 = dead. 1 = single vegetative rosette. 2 = single inflorescence. 3 = multiple vegetative rosette. 4 = multiple inflorescence. * lengthxx = length of longest leaf in year 20xx in mm. * leavesxx = number of leaves in rosette(s) in year 20xx. **File:** snowmelt.csv * Year = year * Snowmelt = day of first bare ground at the RMBL in units of day starting with January 1. Values prior to 1975 were estimated. **File:** selection*vs*snowmelt.csv * meltday = day of first bare ground at the RMBL in units of day starting with January 1. * year = year * Sbyyearwithsite = standardized selection differential on SLA in model that includes site. These values are reproduced with standard errors in Table 1. * bwithsite = regression coefficient for raw survival on raw SLA in model that includes site. * meansurv = mean survival * covwsla = raw selection differential on SLA * bwithsitehyb = regression coefficient for raw survival on SLA at site hyb * meansurvhyb = mean survival at site hyb * covwslahyb = raw selection differential on SLA at site hyb used in the Gradual environmental change model * covwslaagg = raw selection differential on SLA at site agg used in the Gradual environmental change model * meansurvagg = mean survival at site agg * melthyb = estimated date of bare ground at site hyb * meltagg = estimated date of bare ground at site agg **File:** IPMresults.csv * site = site. agg = site with I. aggregata. hyb = site with natural hybrids. * day = predicted day of snowmelt (all predictions are from Campbell, D. R. 2019. Early snowmelt projected to cause population decline in a subalpine plant. PNAS (USA) 116(26) 1290-12906.) Units are days starting with January 1. * lambda = predicted finite rate of increase **File:** Campbell-EvolutionLettersMay2025.Rmd Contains R code for data analysis and modeling. All analysis and modeling was done in R ver 4.2.2."]}
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10652967
- Publisher / Repository:
- Dryad
- Date Published:
- Edition / Version:
- 3
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- cimate change Natural selection phenotypic plasticity Plants FOS: Biological sciences FOS: Biological sciences
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: 39183 bytes
- Size(s):
- 39183 bytes
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Background and AimsFloral volatiles, visual traits and rewards mediate attraction and defence in plant–pollinator and plant–herbivore interactions, but these floral traits might be altered by global warming through direct effects of temperature or longer-term impacts on plant resources. We examined the effect of warming on floral and leaf volatile emissions, floral morphology, plant height, nectar production, and oviposition by seed predators. MethodsWe used open-top chambers that warmed plants in the field by +2–3 °C on average (+6–11 °C increase in daily maxima) for 2–4 weeks across 1–3 years at three sites in Colorado, USA. Volatiles were sampled from two closely related species of subalpine Ipomopsis with different pollinators: Ipomopsis aggregata ssp. aggregata, visited mainly by hummingbirds, and Ipomopsis tenuituba ssp. tenuituba, often visited by hawkmoths. Key ResultsAlthough warming had no detected effects on leaf volatiles, the daytime floral volatiles of both I. aggregata and I. tenuituba responded in subtle ways to warming, with impacts that depended on the species, site and year. In addition to the long-term effect of warming, temperature at the time of sampling independently affected the floral volatile emissions of I. aggregata during the day and I. tenuituba at night. Warming had little effect on floral morphology for either species and it had no effect on nectar concentration, maximum inflorescence height or flower redness in I. aggregata. However, warming increased nectar production in I. aggregata by 41 %, a response that would attract more hummingbird visits, and it reduced oviposition by fly seed predators by ≥72 %. ConclusionsOur results suggest that floral traits can show different levels of plasticity to temperature changes in subalpine environments, with potential effects on animal behaviours that help or hinder plant reproduction. They also illustrate the need for more long-term field warming studies, as shown by responses of floral volatiles in different ways to weeks of warming vs. temperature at the time of sampling.more » « less
-
Abstract In ecological speciation, incipient species diverge due to natural selection that is ecologically based. In flowering plants, different pollinators could mediate that selection (pollinator-mediated divergent selection) or other features of the environment that differ between habitats of 2 species could do so (environment-mediated divergent selection). Although these mechanisms are well understood, they have received little rigorous testing, as few studies of divergent selection across sites of closely related species include both floral traits that influence pollination and vegetative traits that influence survival. This study employed common gardens in sites of the 2 parental species and a hybrid site, each containing advanced generation hybrids along with the parental species, to test these forms of ecological speciation in plants of the genus Ipomopsis. A total of 3 vegetative traits (specific leaf area, leaf trichomes, and photosynthetic water-use efficiency) and 5 floral traits (corolla length and width, anther insertion, petal color, and nectar production) were analyzed for impacts on fitness components (survival to flowering and seeds per flower, respectively). These traits exhibited strong clines across the elevational gradient in the hybrid zone, with narrower clines in theory reflecting stronger selection or higher genetic variance. Plants with long corollas and inserted anthers had higher seeds per flower at the Ipomopsis tenuituba site, whereas selection favored the reverse condition at the Ipomopsis aggregata site, a signature of divergent selection. In contrast, no divergent selection due to variation in survival was detected on any vegetative trait. Selection within the hybrid zone most closely resembled selection within the I. aggregata site. Across traits, the strength of divergent selection was not significantly correlated with width of the cline, which was better predicted by evolvability (standardized genetic variance). These results support the role of pollinator-mediated divergent selection in ecological speciation and illustrate the importance of genetic variance in determining divergence across hybrid zones.more » « less
-
{"Abstract":["Adaptive evolution is a key means for populations to persist under\n environmental change, yet whether populations across a species’ range can\n adapt quickly enough to keep pace with climate change remains unknown. The\n breeder’s equation predicts the evolutionary change in a trait from one\n generation to the next as the product of the selection differential and\n the narrow-sense heritability in that trait. Incorporating these aspects\n of the breeder’s equation, we performed a resurrection study with the\n scarlet monkeyflower (Mimulus cardinalis) to evaluate whether traits\n associated with drought adaptation have evolved in populations across a\n species’ range in response to extreme drought. We compared trait and\n fitness differences of pre-drought ancestors and post-drought descendants\n from six populations transplanted into three latitudinally-arrayed common\n gardens and quantified phenotypic selection and trait heritabilities. The\n strength, direction, and mode of selection varied among traits and\n gardens. Trait heritabilities were relatively low and did not differ\n dramatically among populations or gardens. Overall, instances of\n evolutionary responses between ancestors and descendants were few and\n small in magnitude, but the magnitude of these evolutionary differences\n varied among gardens. Together, these results suggest that the expression\n of genetic variation, and thus traits, depends on the environment, and\n that environmental variability in field settings may mask the genetic\n variation that is often detected in greenhouse environments. "],"TechnicalInfo":["# Data from: Evolutionary responses to historic drought across the range\n of scarlet monkeyflower\n [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.18931zd7g](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.18931zd7g) ## Description of the data and file structure These data are associated with a common garden study of scarlet monkeyflower (*Mimulus cardinalis*). In 2023, we transplanted pre-drought 2010 ancestors alongside post-drought 2017 descendants from two northern-edge, two central, and two southern-edge populations into three experimental gardens near the northern range edge, latitudinal range center, and southern range edge in the western United States. We collected data on several physiological and leaf traits associated with adaptation to drought, along with proxies for fitness, including survival and reproductive output. ### Files and variables 1\\. **PERSIST_2023_data.csv**: 2023 trait data for all populations and cohorts in all gardens * garden: experimental garden (north, center, south) - block: experimental randomized block in garden (1 - 10 in north, 1 - 11 in center, 1 - 10 in south) * garden_block: variable that combines garden and block - row: row (y-coordinate) of experimental garden; with 4 rows per block; rows 101 - 104 are in block 1; rows 1101 - 1104 are in block 11, etc. * position: position (x-coordinate) of experimental garden; corresponds to a unique plant ID (Cross_ID_Rep), or has no plant (NA) - rowPosition: variable that combines row and position * Cross_ID_Rep: variable that combines unique ID for each full-sibling family and replicate of that family within a particular garden - Cross_ID: unique ID for each full-sibling family; each Cross_ID has a unique mom and dad * Sire_ID: unique ID for sire (father); plants with the same Sire_ID and different Dam_IDs are half-sibs - Dam_ID: unique ID for sire (mother); dams are nested within sires to yield a nested half-sib/full-sib design * Population: Population of scarlet monkeyflower (N1 and N2: northern populations; C1 and C2: central populations; S1 and S2: southern populations) - Year: Year that seeds were collected in the field (2010 ancestors and 2017 descendants) * Year1: Alternate coding for year corresponding to "ancestor" and "descendant" - Date_early: Date of early-season li-600 data collection * Time_early: Time of early-season li-600 data collection - VPDleaf_early: Leaf vapor pressure deficit at the time of early-season li-600 data collection * gsw_early: Early-season stomatal conductance to water vapor, measured at the leaf level with a li-600 porometer in units of mmol/m²/s - freshMass_g: Fresh leaf mass in grams (CDM please add something here about leaf selection) * dryMass_g: Oven-dried leaf mass in grams (CDM please add something here about leaf selection) - leafArea_cm2: Leaf area in square centimeters, derived from leaf scans (CDM please clarify) * lma_g_per_m2: Dry leaf mass in grams per area in meters squared (CDM please clarify) - ldmc: Leaf dry matter content, measured as dry leaf mass in grams divided by fresh leaf mass in grams * sla_cm2_per_g: specific leaf area, measured as leaf area in squared centimeters divided by dry leaf mass in grams - L1: Length of the primary or longest stem at first flower in centimeters * L2: Length of the second longest stem at first flower in centimeters - L3: Length of the third longest stem at first flower in centimeters * totalStemLen: Sum of the lengths of the three longest stems at first flower in centimeters - first_flower_date: Date of first flower * first_flower_doy: Day of year of first flower - last_flower_date: Date of last flower; note this is not reliable because we did not continue collecting data after a certain point in the growing season * last_flower_doy: Day of year of last flower; note this is not reliable because we did not continue collecting data after a certain point in the growing season - flowering_duration: Duration of flowering expressed as the difference between the date of last flower and the date of first flower; note this is not reliable because we did not continue collecting data after a certain point in the growing season * Date_late: Date of late-season li-600 data collection - Time_late: Time of late-season li-600 data collection * VPDleaf_late: Leaf vapor pressure deficit at the time of late-season li-600 data collection - gsw_late: Late-season stomatal conductance to water vapor, measured at the leaf level with a li-600 porometer in units of mmol/m²/s * maxHeight: Maximum stem height in centimeters at the end of the growing season - repBranchN: Number of major reproductive branches at the end of the growing season * RScount1: Number of reproductive structures (flowers, fruits, buds, and pedicels) counted on the stem with the most reproductive structures at the end of the growing season - RScount2: Number of reproductive structures (flowers, fruits, buds, and pedicels) counted on a representative major reproductive branch at the end of the growing season * RScount3: Number of reproductive structures (flowers, fruits, buds, and pedicels) counted on a representative major reproductive branch at the end of the growing season - totalRS: An estimate of the total number of reproductive structures (flowers, fruits, buds, and pedicels) on a plant, calculated as described in Supplementary Methods and Results 2\\. **PERSIST_populations_gardens_1901-2021SY.csv**: annual climate data (1951-2021) for focal populations and experimental gardens. Downloaded from climateNA v. 7.30 on 2022-09-14 (Wang T, Hamann A, Spittlehouse D, Carroll C (2016) Locally Downscaled and Spatially Customizable Climate Data for Historical and Future Periods for North America. PLoS ONE 11(6): e0156720. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156720](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156720)) * Year: year to which climate data corresponds - ID1: identifier corresponding to population (N1 and N2: northern populations; C1 and C2: central populations; S1 and S2: southern populations) or experimental garden (N_garden: northern garden; C_garden: central garden; S_garden: southern garden) * ID2: identifier that ranks population from northernmost (1) to southernmost (6) - Latitude: y-position of each population or garden in decimal degrees * Longitude: x-position of each population or garden in decimal degrees - Elevation: meters above sea level of each population or garden All other columns are climate variables with units and definitions defined here: [https://climatena.ca/Help2](https://climatena.ca/Help2) 3\\. **subset_correlations.csv**: 2023 fitness data collected on a subset of individuals from each garden * rowPos: Variable that combines row and position (unique plant ID within each garden) - garden: Experimental garden (north, central, south) * population: Population of scarlet monkeyflower (N1 and N2: northern populations; C1 and C2: central populations; S1 and S2: southern populations) - cohort: Year that seeds were collected in the field (2010 ancestors and 2017 descendants) * repBranchN: The number of reproductive branches on an individual (used to calculate total number of reproductive structures/successful fruits) - biomass: mass of the whole plant in grams * L1: Length of the primary (usually longest) stem at first flower in centimeters - L2: Length of the second longest stem at first flower in centimeters * L3: Length of the third longest stem at first flower in centimeters - SC1: Successful fruit count for stem 1 * SC2: Successful fruit count for stem 2 - SC3: Successful fruit count for stem 3 * TC1: Total reproductive structure count for stem 1 - TC2: Total reproductive structure count for stem 2 * TC3: Total reproductive structure count for stem 3 Missing data code: NA ## Code/software #### Code and objects associated with "Evolutionary responses to historic drought across the range of scarlet monkeyflower" Manuscript is in review at The American Naturalist #### STEPS #### A. Download entire repository to desired location B. Open PERSIST-general.Rproj file in R Studio C. Install associated R packages listed at the beginning of each script. D. Create a new subdirectory with the structure "figures/2024_AmNat/manuscript" #### DIRECTORY DESCRIPTIONS data/2024_AmNat: raw data files used in analyses and figures r/2024_AmNat: script files to reproduce analyses in manuscript, numbered sequentially objects/2024_AmNat: output files created by R scripts PERSIST.Rproj: R Studio project file README.txt: text file that contains descriptions of each data file and R script #### SCRIPTS 01a_anomalies_climateNA.R: Calculate winter precipitation anomalies, make Fig. 2b and c 01b_Cardinalis_map.R: Make Fig. 2 (map of Mimulus cardinals populations and experimental gardens combined with panels from script 01a) 02_R_analyses.R: Run models with each trait as response variable to estimate trait medians, evolutionary change between ancestors and descendants and quantitative genetic parameters for each population and cohort in each garden 03_selection_analyses.R: Run models with fitness as response variable and each trait as a predictor to estimate phenotypic selection in each garden 04a_summary_R_h2_NCS.R: Summarize trait models from script 02 for traits measured in all gardens 04b_summary_R_h2_NS.R: Summarize trait models from script 02 for traits only measured in northern and southern gardens 05_model_selection_Va.R: Compare different models of additive genetic variance and make Table S9 06_plot_R_h2.R: Make figures and tables of trait medians (Fig. 3, Table S6), evolutionary change between ancestors and descendants (Fig. 6, Table S10) and quantitative genetic parameters for each population and cohort in each garden (Fig. 5, Table S8) 07a_summary_S_NCS.R: Summarize selection models from script 03 for traits measured in all gardens 07b_summary_S_NS.R: Summarize selection models from script 03 for traits only measured in northern and southern gardens 08_plot_S.R: Make figures and tables of phenotypic selection (Fig. 5, Table S7) 09_fitness-subset-correlations.R: Perform simple correlation tests among various fitness proxies measured on a subset of plants in each garden and make Fig. S1 and S2 and Table S3. 10_sample_sizes_sires_dams.R: Extract sample sizes reported in Tables S2 and S4. 11_brms_vs_mcmcglmm.R: Compare global brms model including data from all populations, cohorts, and gardens, to sub-models in brms and MCMCglmm built from each ancestral cohort of each population x garden combination (Table S5, Figure S3). 12_gxe_plot.R: Visualize genotype-by-environment interactions by plotting breeding values of each population across each pair of gardens (Figure S4). #### OBJECTS The scripts produce several intermediate objects. These are included in the repository but are not individually listed and described here. ## Access information Climate data were downloaded from climateNA v. 7.30 on 2022-09-14 (Wang T, Hamann A, Spittlehouse D, Carroll C (2016) Locally Downscaled and Spatially Customizable Climate Data for Historical and Future Periods for North America. PLoS ONE 11(6): e0156720. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156720](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156720))"]}more » « less
-
Phenotypic plasticity can alter traits that are crucial to population\n establishment in a new environment, before adaptation can occur. How often\n phenotypic plasticity enables subsequent adaptive evolution is unknown,\n and examples of the phenomenon are limited. We investigated the hypothesis\n of plasticity-mediated persistence as a means of colonization of\n agricultural fields in one of the world’s worst weeds, Raphanus\n raphanistrum ssp. raphanistrum. Using non-weedy native populations of the\n same species and subspecies as a comparison, we tested for\n plasticity-mediated persistence in a growth chamber reciprocal transplant\n experiment. We identified traits with genetic differentiation between the\n weedy and native ecotypes as well as phenotypic plasticity between growth\n chamber environments. We found that most traits were both plastic and\n differentiated between ecotypes, with the majority plastic and\n differentiated in the same direction. This suggests that phenotypic\n plasticity may have enabled radish populations to colonize and then adapt\n to novel agricultural environments."],"TechnicalInfo":["# Growth Chamber Reciprocal Transplant Dataset\n [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4mw6m90kb](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4mw6m90kb) This dataset contains the phenotypic data collected from plants grown in the growth chamber reciprocal transplant experiment, as well as the conditions in the growth chambers. ## Description of the data and file structure The dataset contains three sheets: "Chamber Conditions", "Main Data", and "Leaf Data" (although much of the information in "Leaf Data" has been incorporated into "Main data") ### Chamber Conditions This sheet contains the temperature and day length set points for each chamber each week. All temperature and day length information from the two weather stations used (LGER and KBTL) were collected from [www.wunderground.com](http://www.wunderground.com). Variables: * Granada, Spain (LGER) - the dates from which we collected temperature and day length information from the Grenada, Spain weather station (LGER) to simulate in the Winter Annual chamber * HighTempGrenada - the Winter Annual chamber's daytime set points, based on the average maximum temperature in Grenada on a given day * LowTempGrenada - the Winter Annual chamber's nighttime set points, based on the average minimum temperature in Grenada on a given day * DayLengthGrenada - the length of time the Winter Annual chamber was in its day cycle (lights on and typically higher temps), based on length of visible light in Grenada * DayStartGrenada - programed start of day time in the Winter Annual growth chamber * DayEndGrenada - programmed end of day time in the Winter Annual growth chamber * Date Set - the real-life date on which we changed the chamber conditions. * Augusta, MI (KBTL) - the dates from which we collected temperature and day length information from the Augusta, MI, USA weather station (KBTL) to simulate in the Spring Annual chamber * HighTempAugusta - the Spring Annual chamber's daytime set points, based on the average maximum temperature in Augusta on a given day * LowTempAugusta - the Spring Annual chamber's nighttime set points, based on the average minimum temperature in Augusta on a given day * DayLengthAugusta - the length of time the Spring Annual chamber was in its day cycle (lights on and typically higher temps), based on length of visible light in Augusta * DayStartAugusta - programed start of day time in the Spring Annual growth chamber * DayEndAugusta - programmed end of day time in the Spring Annual growth chamber ### Main Data This sheet contains all of the data used in our analyses, as well as descriptors for plants and growth chambers. Variables: * Chamber # - the number designation of the four growth chambers used in this study * Environment - the growing conditions in a given growth chamber, with "Winter Annual" corresponding to the "Grenada, Spain (LGER)" columns in Chamber Conditions, and "Spring Annual" corresponding to "Augusta, MI (KBTL)" * Ecotype - variety of* R. raphanistrum*, either weedy or native * Population - the six source populations used in this study identified by their location codes, with the final two letters denoting country or state (FR=France, ES=Spain, NY=New York, NC=North Carolina) and the first two letters denoting a specific location in those areas (available in Table 1 of the manuscript) * Matriline - a line number is listed when discrete matrilines are known from field collections, but not for seeds collected in bulk (in which case the cell will be blank) * Flat - plants were arranged into four flats in each chamber, and the flats within a chamber were each assigned a number (1-4) * Position - the position of each plant within a flat was also tracked and pots were assigned a position number (1-35) * Pot# - Number assigned to each plant to give it a unique identifier -- for plants with individual matrilines tracked, pot # only went up to 2, while plants with unknown matrilines had pot numbers up to 40 to ensure individuals could be tracked * Plant Date - the date seeds were sown into each pot * Germ[1-5] - the date that each one of 5 seeds planted emerged as a germinant -- blank cells indicate that a germinant did not emerge * Plant Kept - the emergence date of the single plant that remained in the pot after excess germinants were thinned; missing values mean no germinants emerged or did not survive past the seedling stage * Days to Emergence - calculated as the day of emergence minus the planting date; missing values mean no germinants emerged or did not survive past the seedling stage * Rosette Photo Date - the date on which overhead and side photos of plants were taken, also the day the plants first showed signs of bolting (buds visible); missing values mean the plant did not survive to bolting * \\# Rosette Leaves - the number of leaves in the basal rosette, counted on the day of bolting; missing values mean the plant did not survive to bolting * Rosette Height - the vertical height of the tallest free-standing basal rosette leaf, measured from the height of the soil (cm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to bolting * 1st flower date - the date on which the first flower on a plant opened; missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering * Days to First Flower - calculated as 1st flower date minus emergence date; missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering * 1st Flower Height - measured on the first flower date, it is the vertical distance from the soil to the point at which the first open flower's pedicel connects to the main stalk (cm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering * Ovule # - collected from typically the third flower to open, it is the number of ovules in one flower of a given plant; missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or ovules were not clearly visible * Notes - any additional information on a plant that we tracked * Blossom Photo Date - the date on which we took top and side photographs of at least the third flower to open, taken at the same time that ovule number was counted; missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering * PetalLength - measured using a top-view photo in Image J, the distance from the tip of the petal to where it meets the floral tube in the center of the floral display (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * PetalWidth - measured using a top-view photo in Image J, the distance from the widest part of the petal, perpendicular to the line measured for petal length (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * Tube - measured using a side-view photo in Image J, the length of the most clearly visible petal from where it meets the pedicel to the apex of its curve outward (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * LAnther - measured using a side-view photo in Image J, the length of the anther of the long stamen from where it meets its filament to its tip (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * LFilament - measured using a side-view photo in Image J, the length of the frontmost (closest to the camera) long filament from where it meets the pedicel to where it meets its anther (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * SAnther - measured using a side-view photo in Image J, the length of the anther of the short stamen from where it meets its filament to its tip (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * SFilament - measured using a side-view photo in Image J, the length of the frontmost (closest to the camera) short filament from where it meets the pedicel to where it meets its anther (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * Pistil - measured using a side-view photo in Image J, the length of the pistil made by drawing a line down the center of the pistil from the top of the stigma to where it meets the pedicel (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or the view in the photo was obscured so the measurement could not be taken * AntherExsertion - calculated as long filament length minus the tube length (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or that either one of the values needed for the measurement was missing * AntherSeparation - calculated as long filament length minus the short filament length (mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or one or that either one of the values needed for the measurement was missing * FlowerSize - the geometric mean of all floral traits (excluding anther exsertion and anther separation; mm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to flowering or one or more flower trait was missing * LeafWidth - measured using either a top-view or side-view photo in Image J, the distance between each edge of the leaf measured at its widest point, with the line being perpendicular to the central leaf vein on the largest fully visible leaf (more information in the Leaf Data sheet; cm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to bolting or a picture was not taken * LeafLength - measured using either a top-view or side-view photo in Image J using the segmented line tool, follow the central vein of the largest visible leaf from the center of the rosette to the tip of the leaf (more information in the Leaf Data sheet; cm); missing values mean the plant did not survive to bolting or a picture was not taken ### Leaf Data This sheet includes some additional information about Leaf Length and Leaf Width measurements. Side image was only used when leaf was not flat or clearly visible in the top image. Variables: * Top Photo Image - image ID of the top view photo of the plant being measured * Ecotype - the ecotype of the plant (more information in Main Data) * Population - the population that the plant belongs to (more information in Main Data) * Plant Label - the label visible in the image -- includes population, matriline (when available), and pot # * Leaf Width (cm) - measured using the top-view photo in Image J, the distance between each edge of the leaf measured at its widest point, with the line being perpendicular to the central leaf vein on the largest fully visible leaf; missing values mean that a picture was not taken or the leaf was obscured in the top view photo * Leaf Length 1 (cm) - measured using the top-view photo in Image J using the segmented line tool, follow the central vein of the largest visible leaf from the center of the rosette to the tip of the leaf; missing values mean that a picture was not taken or the leaf was obscured in the top view photo * Side Photo Image - Image ID of the side view photo of the plant being measured; side image was only used when leaf was not flat or clearly visible in the top image, so missing values indicate that the length and width of the leaf could be reliably measured using the top view photo * Leaf Length 2 (cm) - measured using the side-view photo in Image J using the segmented line tool, follow the central vein of the largest visible leaf from the center of the rosette to the tip of the leaf; missing values mean that a picture was not taken or that the length of the leaf could be reliably measured using the top view photo * Leaf Width 2 (cm) - measured using the side-view photo in Image J, the distance between each edge of the leaf measured at its widest point, with the line being perpendicular to the central leaf vein on the largest fully visible leaf; missing values mean that a picture was not taken or that the width of the leaf could be reliably measured using the top view photo * Notes - any additional information about the the measurement of a particular plants' leaf length or width"]}more » « less
An official website of the United States government
