Title: Lecture 2: Analysis of Adaptation
1Lecture 2 Analysis of Adaptation
- Adaptation a feature that, because it increases
fitness, has been shaped by NS - In other words
- NS genetic variation adaptation
- Adaptations are not always obvious
- e.g. Eyesight vs. Giraffes neck
2Adaptations
- When analyzing adaptation we need to remember
- Not all features of a population are adaptive
- Not all adaptations are perfect
3Analysis of Adaptation
- We need to
- Show that a trait has been shaped by NS
- Determine the agent of selection
44 Ways to Identify an Adaptation
- COMPLEXITY
- Complex structures are usually adaptive
- e.g. ampullae of Lorenzini
- Variants of complex structures may not be
adaptive (e.g. Hb)
52) Engineering
- Does the trait fit efficient model predicted by
engineering? - e.g. Fish shapes
- Fits aerodynamic prediction
- Form fits function
63) Convergence
- Correlational Evidence Convergent Evolution
7- Patterns of convergence are studied using the
COMPARATIVE METHOD - Variation in character should correlate with
selective pressures of ecological context - Problem similarity can mean similar adaptive
response or close relationship - Need traits that arise independently in
different phylogenies
8- Eliminate the effect of common ancestry
therefore ecology is the determining factor - Thus need correct phylogeny
Conclusion biparental care adaptive response
9Experiments
- 4) Experimental manipulation
- Manipulate a trait and see if affects fitness
- e.g. Swallows tails
- e.g. Bower birds
- e.g. Zonosemata flies
10Zonosemata
- Dark banded wings, waving behaviour
- Main predator jumping spiders
- Does wing colouration or waving reduce predation?
(mimicry?)
11- 5 test flies
- Untreated Zonosemata, sham surgery, housefly
wings, housefly with Zonosemata wings, housefly - Against jumping spider and other predator
- Needed to have both markings waving to repel
jumping spider (no surgery effect) - No effect on any other predators
- Mimic jumping spiders to avoid jumping spider
predation
12Cepea nemoralis
- Snails vary in colour
- of bands (polymorphism)
- Morphotype varies with habitat
- Why?
- Engineering thermoregn depends on darkness
- Experimental camouflage thrush predation
13Examples
- Evolution of sex
- Sexual selection
- Evolution of sex ratio
14Evolution of Sex
- Sex is costly so why is it so common?
- Asexual reproduction is only found in patches on
the phylogenetic tree - Asexual species have higher rates of extinction
than sexual species
15Model Asexual variant
- e.g. Given each female has 2 offspring, no
difference in survival
Asexual 100 females Sexual 100 females (100 males) Frequency p(female) 0.33
200 females 100 females (100 males) p(female) 0.5
400 females 100 females (100 males) p(female) 0.67
16Sexual vs. Asexual
- Sexual females lose ½ genes in each generation
to survive to repro females must be fit but their
mate may be less fit - Sexual female has ½ fitness of asexual
- Plus, costs of finding a mate, STDs etc.
- Given this disadvantage, there must be a benefit
in sexual reproduction
17Models Assumptions Violated
- 1. Reproductive mode does not affect number of
offspring - Parental care/Nuptial gifts (fairly rare)
- 2. Reproductive mode does not affect survival of
offspring
18Group Selectionist Argumentsex accelerates rate
of evolution
- Increases a groups ability to respond to
changing environment - Asexual populations have a higher extinction rate
- Given 2 loci with 2 alleles (Aa Bb)
- p(A) gtgtgt p(a)
- p(B) gtgtgt p(b)
- (A B are fixed)
- a b interact to increase fitness
19How get aabb in one individual?
- Asexual AABB ? aabb only by mutation
- get AaBB and AABb but
- p(AABB ? aabb) ? 0
- Sexual recombination
- AaBB x AABb
- Gives AABB AaBB AABb AaBb
- AaBb x AaBb aabb
- Mutant genotype can arise quickly and prevent
extinction
20Mutation rate is important
- Mutation rate slow
- Sexual ? Asexual
- No advantage to sex
- Mutation rate fast
- Sexual gt Asexual
Thus, sexual popns can outcompete asexual
popns Sex is still disadvantageous to the
individual