Reciprocal selection causes a coevolutionary arms race between crossbills and lodgepole pine

American Naturalist

Volumn 162, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 182-194

  Benkman, Craig W ^a   Parchman, Thomas L ^a   Favis, Amanda ^a   Siepielski, Adam M ^a  

^a NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Geographic selection mosaic; Loxia curvirostra; Pinus contorta ssp. latifolia; Predator prey interaction; Seed predation; Tamiasciurus hudsonicus

Indexed keywords

BIRD; COEVOLUTION; EVOLUTION; SEED PREDATION; TREE;

ADAPTATION; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; EVOLUTION; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; HISTOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PINE; PLANT SEED; PREDATION; SCIURIDAE; SONGBIRD; UNITED STATES;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ANIMALS; EVOLUTION; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; PINUS; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR; SCIURIDAE; SEEDS; SELECTION (GENETICS); SONGBIRDS; UNITED STATES;

UNITED STATES;

ANIMALIA; AVES; LOXIA; LOXIA CURVIROSTRA; PASSERI; PINUS CONTORTA; SCIURIDAE; SPERMATOPHYTA; TAMIASCIURUS; TAMIASCIURUS HUDSONICUS;

EID: 0042477584     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/376580     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Abrams, P. A. 1986. Adaptive responses of predator to prey and prey to predators: the failure of the arms race analogy. Evolution 40:1229-1247.
2. _. 2000. The evolution of predator-prey interactions: theory and evidence. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31:79-105.
3. Benkman, C. W. 1987. Food profitability and the foraging ecology of crossbills. Ecological Monographs 57:251-267.
4. _. 1989. Intake rate maximization and the foraging behaviour of crossbills. Ornis Scandinavica 20:65-68.
5. _. 1990. Intake rates and the timing of crossbill reproduction. Auk 107:376-386.
6. _. 1993. Adaptation to single resources and the evolution of crossbill (Loxia) diversity. Ecological Monographs 63:305-325.
7. _. 1999. The selection mosaic and diversifying coevolution between crossbills and lodgepole pine. American Naturalist 153(suppl.):S75-S91.
8. _. 2003. Divergent selection drives the adaptive radiation of crossbills. Evolution 57:1176-1181.
9. Benkman, C. W., and R. E. Miller. 1996. Morphological evolution in response to fluctuating selection. Evolution 50:2499-2504.
10. Benkman, C. W., W. C. Holimon, and J. W. Smith. 2001. The influence of a competitor on the geographic mosaic of coevolution between crossbills and lodgepole pine. Evolution 55:282-294.
11. Berenbaum, M. R., and A. R. Zangerl. 1998. Chemical phenotype matching between a plant and its insect herbivore. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 95:13743-13748.
12. Brodie, E. D., Jr., B. J. Ridenhour, and E. D. Brodie III. 2002. The evolutionary response of predators to dangerous prey: hotspots and coldspots in the geographic mosaic of coevolution between garter snakes and newts. Evolution 56:2067-2082.
13. Brodie, E. D. III, and E. D. Brodie, Jr. 1999. Predator-prey arms races. BioScience 49:557-568.
14. Burdon, J. J., and P. H. Thrall. 1999. Spatial and temporal patterns in coevolving plant and pathogen associations. American Naturalist 153(suppl.):S15-S33.
15. Clayton, D. H., P. L. M. Lee, D. M. Tompkins, and E. D. Brodie III. 1999. Reciprocal natural selection on host-parasite phenotypes. American Naturalist 154:261-270.
16. Critchfield, W. B. 1957. Geographic variation in Pinus contorta. Maria Moors Cabot Foundation Publication no. 3. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
17. Crossley, D. I. 1956. Fruiting habits of lodgepole pine. Technical Note 35. Forest Research Division, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, Ottawa.
18. Davies, N. B., and M. Brooke. 1989a. An experimental study of co-evolution between the cuckoo, Cuculus canorus, and its hosts. I. Host egg discrimination. Journal of Animal Ecology 58:207-224.
19. _. 1989b. An experimental study of co-evolution between the cuckoo, Cuculus canorus, and its hosts. II. Host egg markings, chick discrimination and general discussion. Journal of Animal Ecology 58:225-236.
20. Dawkins, R., and J. R. Krebs. 1979. Arms races between and within species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, Biological Sciences 205:489-511.
21. Dybdahl, M. F., and C. M. Lively. 1998. Host-parasite coevolution: evidence for rare advantage and time-lagged selection in a natural population. Evolution 52:1057-1066.
22. Elliott, P. F. 1974. Evolutionary responses of plants to seed-eaters: pine squirrel predation on lodgepole pine. Evolution 28:221-231.
23. _. 1988a. Foraging behavior of a central-place forager: field tests of theoretical predictions. American Naturalist 131:159-174.
24. _. 1988b. The influence of population density and body size on the behavioral ecology of the pine squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus). Natural History Paper no. 1. Mountain Research Center, University of Colorado, Boulder.
25. Geffeney, S., E. D. Brodie, Jr., P. C. Ruben, and E. D. Brodie III. 2002. Mechanisms of adaptation in a predator-prey arms race: TTX-resistant sodium channels. Science (Washington, D.C.) 297:1336-1339.
26. Groth, J. G. 1993. Evolutionary differentiation in morphology, vocalizations, and allozymes among nomadic sibling species in the North American red crossbill (Loxia curvirostra) complex. University of California Publication in Zoology no. 127. Berkeley.
27. Hulme, P., and C. W. Benkman. 2002. Granivory. Pages 132-154 in C. Herrera and O. Pellmyr, eds. Plant-animal interactions: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell Scientific, New York.
28. Janzen, D. H. 1980. When is it coevolution? Evolution 34:611-612.
29. Janzen, F. J., and H. S. Stern. 1998. Logistic regression for empirical studies of multivariate selection. Evolution 52:1564-1571.
30. Johnson, E. A., and S. L. Gutsell. 1993. Heat budget and fire behavior associated with the opening of serotinous cones in two Pinus species. Journal of Vegetation Science 4:745-750.
31. Kelly, D., and V. L. Sork. 2002. Mast seeding in perennial plants: why, how, where? Annual Review of Systematics and Ecology 33:427-447.
32. Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210-1226.
33. Latta, S. C., and J. Faaborg. 2001. Winter site fidelity of prairie warblers in the Dominican Republic. Condor 103:455-468.
34. Lessells, C. M., and P. T. Boag. 1987. Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116-121.
35. Lively, C. M. 1999. Migration, virulence, and the geographic mosaic of adaptation by parasites. American Naturalist 153(suppl.):S34-S47.
36. Lotan, J. E. 1975. The role of cone serotiny in lodgepole pine forests. Pages 471-495 in D. M. Baumgartner, ed. Management of lodgepole pine ecosystems. Symposium Proceedings. Washington State University, Pullman.
37. Lotan, J. E., and D. A. Perry. 1983. Ecology and regeneration of lodgepole pine. Agriculture Handbook no. 606. USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C.
38. McGinley, M. A., C. C. Smith, P. F. Elliott, and J. J. Higgins. 1990. Morphological constraints on seed mass in lodgepole pine. Functional Ecology 4:183-192.
39. Nuismer, S. L., J. N. Thompson, and R. Gomulkiewicz. 1999. Gene flow and geographically structured coevolution. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, Biological Sciences 266:605-609.
40. Parchman, T. L., and C. W. Benkman. 2002. Diversifying coevolution between crossbills and black spruce on Newfoundland. Evolution 56:1663-1672.
41. Pellmyr, O., and C. J. Huth. 1994. Evolutionary stability of mutualism between yuccas and yucca moths. Nature 372:257-260.
42. Pellmyr, O., J. N. Thompson, J. M. Brown, and R. G. Harrison. 1996. Evolution of pollination and mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. American Naturalist 148:827-847.
43. Pence, D. B., R. A. Cole, K. E. Burgger, and J. R. Fischer. 1999. Epizootic podoknemidokoptiasis in American robins. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 35:1-7.
44. Schluter, D. 1988. Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. Evolution 42:849-861.
45. Schwilk, D. W., and D. D. Ackerly. 2001. Flammability and serotiny as strategies: correlated evolution in pines. Oikos 94:326-336.
46. Senar, J. C., A. Borras, T. Cabrera, and J. Cabrera. 1993. Testing for the relationship between coniferous crop stability and common crossbill residence. Journal of Field Ornithology 64:464-469.
47. Smith, C. C. 1968. The adaptive nature of social organization in the genus of tree squirrels, Tamiasciurus. Ecological Monographs 38:31-63.
48. _. 1970. The coevolution of pine squirrels (Tamiasciurus) and conifers. Ecological Monographs 40:349-371.
49. _. 1981. The indivisible niche of Tamiasciurus: an example of nonpartitioning of resources. Ecological Monographs 51:343-363.
50. Smith, C. C., and R. P. Balda. 1979. Competition among insects, birds and mammals for conifer seeds. American Zoologist 19:1065-1083.
51. Summers, R. W., and R. Proctor. 1999. Tree and cone selection by crossbills Loxia sp. and red squirrels Sciurus vulgaris at Abernethy Forest, Strathspey. Forest Ecology and Management 118:173-182.
52. Thompson, J. N. 1994. The coevolutionary process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
53. _. 1997. Evaluating the dynamics of coevolution among geographically structured populations. Ecology 78:1619-1623.
54. _. 1999a. The evolution of species interactions. Science (Washington, D.C.) 284:2116-2118.
55. _. 1999b. Specific hypotheses on the geographic mosaic of coevolution. American Naturalist 153(suppl.):S1-S14.
56. _. 2001. The geographic dynamics of coevolution. Pages 331-343 in C. W. Fox, D. A. Roff, and D. J. Fairbairn, eds. Evolutionary ecology: concepts and case studies. Oxford University Press, New York.
57. Thompson, J. N., and B. M. Cunningham. 2002. Geographic structure and dynamics of coevolutionary selection. Nature 417:735-738.
58. Thompson, J. N., and O. Pellmyr. 1992. Mutualism with pollinating seed parasites amid co-pollinators: constraints on specialization. Ecology 73:1780-1791.
59. Vermeij, G. J. 1987. Evolution and escalation: an ecological history of life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
60. _. 1994. The evolutionary interaction among species: selection, escalation, and coevolution. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 25:219-236.