Search for: All records

Gradient Forest (GF) is a machine learning algorithm designed to analyze spatial patterns of biodiversity as a function of environmental gradients. An offset measure between the GF‐predicted environmental association of adapted alleles and a new environment (GF Offset) is increasingly being used to predict the loss of environmentally adapted alleles under rapid environmental change, but remains mostly untested for this purpose. Here, we explore the robustness of GF Offset to assumption violations, and its relationship to measures of fitness, using SLiM simulations with explicit genome architecture and a spatial metapopulation. We evaluate measures of GF Offset in: (1) a neutral model with no environmental adaptation; (2) a monogenic “population genetic” model with a single environmentally adapted locus; and (3) a polygenic “quantitative genetic” model with two adaptive traits, each adapting to a different environment. We found GF Offset to be broadly correlated with fitness offsets under both single locus and polygenic architectures. However, neutral demography, genomic architecture, and the nature of the adaptive environment can all confound relationships between GF Offset and fitness. GF Offset is a promising tool, but it is important to understand its limitations and underlying assumptions, especially when used in the context of predicting maladaptation.

 

Complex statistical methods are continuously developed across the fields of ecology, evolution, and systematics (EES). These fields, however, lack standardized principles for evaluating methods, which has led to high variability in the rigor with which methods are tested, a lack of clarity regarding their limitations, and the potential for misapplication. In this review, we illustrate the common pitfalls of method evaluations in EES, the advantages of testing methods with simulated data, and best practices for method evaluations. We highlight the difference between method evaluation and validation and review how simulations, when appropriately designed, can refine the domain in which a method can be reliably applied. We also discuss the strengths and limitations of different evaluation metrics. The potential for misapplication of methods would be greatly reduced if funding agencies, reviewers, and journals required principled method evaluation. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Volume 53 is November 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. 

Across many species where inversions have been implicated in local adaptation, genomes often evolve to contain multiple, large inversions that arise early in divergence. Why this occurs has yet to be resolved. To address this gap, we built forward-time simulations in which inversions have flexible characteristics and can invade a metapopulation undergoing spatially divergent selection for a highly polygenic trait. In our simulations, inversions typically arose early in divergence, captured standing genetic variation upon mutation, and then accumulated many small-effect loci over time. Under special conditions, inversions could also arise late in adaptation and capture locally adapted alleles. Polygenic inversions behaved similarly to a single supergene of large effect and were detectable by genome scans. Our results show that characteristics of adaptive inversions found in empirical studies (e.g. multiple large, old inversions that are F ST outliers, sometimes overlapping with other inversions) are consistent with a highly polygenic architecture, and inversions do not need to contain any large-effect genes to play an important role in local adaptation. By combining a population and quantitative genetic framework, our results give a deeper understanding of the specific conditions needed for inversions to be involved in adaptation when the genetic architecture is polygenic. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Genomic architecture of supergenes: causes and evolutionary consequences’. 

Supergenes are tightly linked sets of loci that are inherited together and control complex phenotypes. While classical supergenes—governing traits such as wing patterns in Heliconius butterflies or heterostyly in Primula —have been studied since the Modern Synthesis, we still understand very little about how they evolve and persist in nature. The genetic architecture of supergenes is a critical factor affecting their evolutionary fate, as it can change key parameters such as recombination rate and effective population size, potentially redirecting molecular evolution of the supergene in addition to the surrounding genomic region. To understand supergene evolution, we must link genomic architecture with evolutionary patterns and processes. This is now becoming possible with recent advances in sequencing technology and powerful forward computer simulations. The present theme issue brings together theoretical and empirical papers, as well as opinion and synthesis papers, which showcase the architectural diversity of supergenes and connect this to critical processes in supergene evolution, such as polymorphism maintenance and mutation accumulation. Here, we summarize those insights to highlight new ideas and methods that illuminate the path forward for the study of supergenes in nature. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Genomic architecture of supergenes: causes and evolutionary consequences’.