Limits...
From Individuals to Groups and Back: The Evolutionary Implications of Group Phenotypic Composition.

Farine DR, Montiglio PO, Spiegel O - Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) (2015)

Bottom Line: Recent studies have investigated how the phenotypic composition of groups or aggregations (e.g., its average phenotype or phenotypic variance) affects ecological and social processes, and how multi-level selection can drive phenotypic covariance among interacting individuals.We present a unified framework to address this gap, and discuss how group phenotypic composition (GPC) can impact on processes ranging from individual fitness to population demography.By emphasising the breadth of topics affected, we hope to motivate more integrated empirical studies of the ecological and evolutionary implications of GPC.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Anthropology, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA; Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panamá, República de Panamá; Edward Grey Institute of Field Ornithology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: damien.farine@zoo.ox.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


The Evolutionary Implications of Group Phenotypic Composition (GPC) in a Nutshell. (A) Individuals show remarkable phenotypic variation in their morphology, behaviour, and life history. (B) Hence, groups (or populations/communities) can vary in their GPC (e.g., their mean phenotype or within group variation). (C) GPC affects group-level outcomes (e.g., the total amount of food a group acquires), thus (D) impacting on individual fitness (Box 1). Beyond the consequences of individual phenotypes on fitness (natural selection), GPC can favour all members (group-level selection) or favour particular phenotypes over others (social selection). Blue (dashed) and black (solid) lines represent two groups with different GPCs. (E) GPC can drive different evolutionary responses. These include traits affecting covariation between individual phenotypes and their GPC (e.g., decisions to join or leave particular groups), the evolution of individual phenotypic plasticity in response to GPC (e.g., individuals change their phenotypes to match the group), or the evolution of individual contributions to GPC (e.g., individuals change the behaviour of group members). These evolutionary responses can then affect the distribution of phenotypes in subsequent generations.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4594155&req=5

fig0005: The Evolutionary Implications of Group Phenotypic Composition (GPC) in a Nutshell. (A) Individuals show remarkable phenotypic variation in their morphology, behaviour, and life history. (B) Hence, groups (or populations/communities) can vary in their GPC (e.g., their mean phenotype or within group variation). (C) GPC affects group-level outcomes (e.g., the total amount of food a group acquires), thus (D) impacting on individual fitness (Box 1). Beyond the consequences of individual phenotypes on fitness (natural selection), GPC can favour all members (group-level selection) or favour particular phenotypes over others (social selection). Blue (dashed) and black (solid) lines represent two groups with different GPCs. (E) GPC can drive different evolutionary responses. These include traits affecting covariation between individual phenotypes and their GPC (e.g., decisions to join or leave particular groups), the evolution of individual phenotypic plasticity in response to GPC (e.g., individuals change their phenotypes to match the group), or the evolution of individual contributions to GPC (e.g., individuals change the behaviour of group members). These evolutionary responses can then affect the distribution of phenotypes in subsequent generations.

Mentions: Research across a range of disparate topics will benefit from simultaneously developing an understanding of how GPC affects individual fitness and exerts selection on individual phenotypes, and assessing how individual phenotypes respond to GPC, ultimately driving an evolutionary response to selection arising from GPC. For example, moving animal groups can contain both leaders and followers [6,7]. Much could be learnt about the evolution of leadership by simultaneously assessing how consistent behavioural differences affect group-level outcomes[8] and how group-level outcomes select for particular phenotypes or shape the distribution of phenotypes in the population. Social selection[4] and social heterosis[9] offer candidate frameworks to study selection arising from the social context, but these still need to be expanded to capture the complexities that can arise from the interactions between individuals (Figure 1). To study the consequences of group composition, we need to draw on evolutionary theory which integrates quantitative genetics and selection.


From Individuals to Groups and Back: The Evolutionary Implications of Group Phenotypic Composition.

Farine DR, Montiglio PO, Spiegel O - Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) (2015)

The Evolutionary Implications of Group Phenotypic Composition (GPC) in a Nutshell. (A) Individuals show remarkable phenotypic variation in their morphology, behaviour, and life history. (B) Hence, groups (or populations/communities) can vary in their GPC (e.g., their mean phenotype or within group variation). (C) GPC affects group-level outcomes (e.g., the total amount of food a group acquires), thus (D) impacting on individual fitness (Box 1). Beyond the consequences of individual phenotypes on fitness (natural selection), GPC can favour all members (group-level selection) or favour particular phenotypes over others (social selection). Blue (dashed) and black (solid) lines represent two groups with different GPCs. (E) GPC can drive different evolutionary responses. These include traits affecting covariation between individual phenotypes and their GPC (e.g., decisions to join or leave particular groups), the evolution of individual phenotypic plasticity in response to GPC (e.g., individuals change their phenotypes to match the group), or the evolution of individual contributions to GPC (e.g., individuals change the behaviour of group members). These evolutionary responses can then affect the distribution of phenotypes in subsequent generations.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4594155&req=5

fig0005: The Evolutionary Implications of Group Phenotypic Composition (GPC) in a Nutshell. (A) Individuals show remarkable phenotypic variation in their morphology, behaviour, and life history. (B) Hence, groups (or populations/communities) can vary in their GPC (e.g., their mean phenotype or within group variation). (C) GPC affects group-level outcomes (e.g., the total amount of food a group acquires), thus (D) impacting on individual fitness (Box 1). Beyond the consequences of individual phenotypes on fitness (natural selection), GPC can favour all members (group-level selection) or favour particular phenotypes over others (social selection). Blue (dashed) and black (solid) lines represent two groups with different GPCs. (E) GPC can drive different evolutionary responses. These include traits affecting covariation between individual phenotypes and their GPC (e.g., decisions to join or leave particular groups), the evolution of individual phenotypic plasticity in response to GPC (e.g., individuals change their phenotypes to match the group), or the evolution of individual contributions to GPC (e.g., individuals change the behaviour of group members). These evolutionary responses can then affect the distribution of phenotypes in subsequent generations.
Mentions: Research across a range of disparate topics will benefit from simultaneously developing an understanding of how GPC affects individual fitness and exerts selection on individual phenotypes, and assessing how individual phenotypes respond to GPC, ultimately driving an evolutionary response to selection arising from GPC. For example, moving animal groups can contain both leaders and followers [6,7]. Much could be learnt about the evolution of leadership by simultaneously assessing how consistent behavioural differences affect group-level outcomes[8] and how group-level outcomes select for particular phenotypes or shape the distribution of phenotypes in the population. Social selection[4] and social heterosis[9] offer candidate frameworks to study selection arising from the social context, but these still need to be expanded to capture the complexities that can arise from the interactions between individuals (Figure 1). To study the consequences of group composition, we need to draw on evolutionary theory which integrates quantitative genetics and selection.

Bottom Line: Recent studies have investigated how the phenotypic composition of groups or aggregations (e.g., its average phenotype or phenotypic variance) affects ecological and social processes, and how multi-level selection can drive phenotypic covariance among interacting individuals.We present a unified framework to address this gap, and discuss how group phenotypic composition (GPC) can impact on processes ranging from individual fitness to population demography.By emphasising the breadth of topics affected, we hope to motivate more integrated empirical studies of the ecological and evolutionary implications of GPC.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Anthropology, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA; Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panamá, República de Panamá; Edward Grey Institute of Field Ornithology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: damien.farine@zoo.ox.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.