Limits...
Integrating evolution into ecological modelling: accommodating phenotypic changes in agent based models.

Moustakas A, Evans MR - PLoS ONE (2013)

Bottom Line: However, most ecological models do not incorporate this ubiquitous phenomenon.When no phenotype transitions are included (i.e. offspring always inherit their parent's phenotype) numbers of all individuals are always underestimated.We conclude that by using a phenotypic gambit approach evolutionary dynamics can be incorporated into individual based models, and that all that is required is an understanding of the probability of offspring inheriting the parental phenotype.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, London, United Kingdom. arismoustakas@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Evolutionary change is a characteristic of living organisms and forms one of the ways in which species adapt to changed conditions. However, most ecological models do not incorporate this ubiquitous phenomenon. We have developed a model that takes a 'phenotypic gambit' approach and focuses on changes in the frequency of phenotypes (which differ in timing of breeding and fecundity) within a population, using, as an example, seasonal breeding. Fitness per phenotype calculated as the individual's contribution to population growth on an annual basis coincide with the population dynamics per phenotype. Simplified model variants were explored to examine whether the complexity included in the model is justified. Outputs from the spatially implicit model underestimated the number of individuals across all phenotypes. When no phenotype transitions are included (i.e. offspring always inherit their parent's phenotype) numbers of all individuals are always underestimated. We conclude that by using a phenotypic gambit approach evolutionary dynamics can be incorporated into individual based models, and that all that is required is an understanding of the probability of offspring inheriting the parental phenotype.

Show MeSH
Fitness per phenotype calculated as the individual’s contribution to population growth on an annual basis following the method (de-lifing) proposed by Coulson et al. (2006a).The method calculates how a population would have performed with the focal individual removed over the time step t to t+1, and it is implemented by retrospectively removing the individual and any offspring that produced between t to t+1 that are still alive at t+1 and recalculating population growth (see section 'Fitness').
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3733718&req=5

pone-0071125-g004: Fitness per phenotype calculated as the individual’s contribution to population growth on an annual basis following the method (de-lifing) proposed by Coulson et al. (2006a).The method calculates how a population would have performed with the focal individual removed over the time step t to t+1, and it is implemented by retrospectively removing the individual and any offspring that produced between t to t+1 that are still alive at t+1 and recalculating population growth (see section 'Fitness').

Mentions: The relative contribution of individuals to the population was much greater for early phenotypes than for mid and late phenotypes (Figure 4). Within that pattern prolific phenotypes always contributed relatively more to the overall population fitness than non-prolific phenotypes. Both mid and late phenotypes typically had negative fitness; early phenotypes made a greater contribution to the overall population fitness at low food availability scenarios than at high food availability. Although mid and late breeding phenotypes still had negative fitness at high food availability it was relatively higher than when food availability was low. Overall, short windows of food availability (low values of var) were associated with higher fitness differences between individuals of the same phenotype.


Integrating evolution into ecological modelling: accommodating phenotypic changes in agent based models.

Moustakas A, Evans MR - PLoS ONE (2013)

Fitness per phenotype calculated as the individual’s contribution to population growth on an annual basis following the method (de-lifing) proposed by Coulson et al. (2006a).The method calculates how a population would have performed with the focal individual removed over the time step t to t+1, and it is implemented by retrospectively removing the individual and any offspring that produced between t to t+1 that are still alive at t+1 and recalculating population growth (see section 'Fitness').
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3733718&req=5

pone-0071125-g004: Fitness per phenotype calculated as the individual’s contribution to population growth on an annual basis following the method (de-lifing) proposed by Coulson et al. (2006a).The method calculates how a population would have performed with the focal individual removed over the time step t to t+1, and it is implemented by retrospectively removing the individual and any offspring that produced between t to t+1 that are still alive at t+1 and recalculating population growth (see section 'Fitness').
Mentions: The relative contribution of individuals to the population was much greater for early phenotypes than for mid and late phenotypes (Figure 4). Within that pattern prolific phenotypes always contributed relatively more to the overall population fitness than non-prolific phenotypes. Both mid and late phenotypes typically had negative fitness; early phenotypes made a greater contribution to the overall population fitness at low food availability scenarios than at high food availability. Although mid and late breeding phenotypes still had negative fitness at high food availability it was relatively higher than when food availability was low. Overall, short windows of food availability (low values of var) were associated with higher fitness differences between individuals of the same phenotype.

Bottom Line: However, most ecological models do not incorporate this ubiquitous phenomenon.When no phenotype transitions are included (i.e. offspring always inherit their parent's phenotype) numbers of all individuals are always underestimated.We conclude that by using a phenotypic gambit approach evolutionary dynamics can be incorporated into individual based models, and that all that is required is an understanding of the probability of offspring inheriting the parental phenotype.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, London, United Kingdom. arismoustakas@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Evolutionary change is a characteristic of living organisms and forms one of the ways in which species adapt to changed conditions. However, most ecological models do not incorporate this ubiquitous phenomenon. We have developed a model that takes a 'phenotypic gambit' approach and focuses on changes in the frequency of phenotypes (which differ in timing of breeding and fecundity) within a population, using, as an example, seasonal breeding. Fitness per phenotype calculated as the individual's contribution to population growth on an annual basis coincide with the population dynamics per phenotype. Simplified model variants were explored to examine whether the complexity included in the model is justified. Outputs from the spatially implicit model underestimated the number of individuals across all phenotypes. When no phenotype transitions are included (i.e. offspring always inherit their parent's phenotype) numbers of all individuals are always underestimated. We conclude that by using a phenotypic gambit approach evolutionary dynamics can be incorporated into individual based models, and that all that is required is an understanding of the probability of offspring inheriting the parental phenotype.

Show MeSH