Towards a general, population-level understanding of eco-evolutionary change

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 143-148

  Smallegange, Isabel M ^a   Coulson, Tim ^a  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGY; ECOSYSTEM RESPONSE; ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE; EVOLUTION; LIFE HISTORY THEORY; NUMERICAL MODEL; POPULATION ECOLOGY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ADAPTATION; CLIMATE CHANGE; EVOLUTION; POPULATION DYNAMICS; REVIEW; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; CLIMATE CHANGE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS;

EID: 84874255854     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.021     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Schoener T.W. The newest synthesis: understanding the interplay of evolutionary and ecological dynamics. Science 2011, 331:426-429.
2. Hairston N.G., et al. Rapid evolution and the convergence of ecological and evolutionary time. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8:1114-1127.
3. Ezard T.H.G., et al. Ecoevolutionary dynamics: disentangling phenotypic, environmental and population fluctuations. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2009, 364:1491-1498.
4. Ellner S.P., et al. Does rapid evolution matter? Measuring the rate of contemporary evolution and its impacts on ecological dynamics. Ecol. Lett. 2011, 14:603-614.
5. Lande R. A quantitative genetic theory of life history evolution. Ecology 1982, 63:607-614.
6. Ozgul A., et al. Coupled dynamics of body mass and population growth in response to environmental change. Nature 2009, 446:482-487.
7. Coulson T., et al. Using evolutionary demography to link life history theory, quantitative genetics and population ecology. J. Anim. Ecol. 2010, 79:1226-1240.
8. Caswell H. Matrix Population Models 2001, Sinauer Associates.
9. Smallegange I.M. Complex environmental effects on the expression of alternative reproductive phenotypes in the bulb mite. Evol. Ecol. 2011, 25:857-873.
10. Easterling M., et al. Size-specific sensitivity: applying a new structured population model. Ecology 2000, 81:694-708.
11. Ellner S.P., Rees M. Integral projection models for species with complex demography. Am. Nat. 2006, 167:410-428.
12. Ellner S.P., Rees M. Stochastic stable population growth in integral projection models: theory and application. J. Math. Biol. 2007, 54:227-256.
13. Rees M., Ellner S.P. Integral projection models for populations in temporally varying environments. Ecol. Monogr. 2009, 79:575-594.
14. Coulson T., et al. Modeling effects of environmental change on wolf population dynamics, trait evolution, and life history. Science 2011, 334:1275-1278.
15. Falconer D.S., Mackay T.F.C. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics 1996, Addison Wesley Longman.
16. Alternative Reproductive Tactics 2008, Cambridge University Press. R.F. Oliveira (Ed.).
17. Tomkins J.L., Hazel W. The status of the conditional evolutionarily stable strategy. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2007, 22:522-528.
18. McGulloch C.E., Searle S.R. Generalized, Linear, and Mixed Models 2001, John Wiley & Sons.
19. Rees M., et al. Evolution of size-dependent flowering in Onopordum illyricum: a quantitative assessment of the role of stochastic selection pressures. Am. Nat. 1999, 154:628-651.
20. Hamel S., et al. Individual quality, early-life conditions, and reproductive success in contrasted populations of large herbivores. Ecology 2009, 90:1981-1995.
21. Benton T.G., et al. Population responses to perturbations: predictions and responses from laboratory mite populations. J. Anim. Ecol. 2004, 73:983-995.
22. Benton T.G., Grant A. Elasticity analysis as an important tool in evolutionary and population ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1999, 14:467-471.
23. Childs D.Z., et al. Evolution of size-dependent flowering in a variable environment: construction and analysis of a stochastic integral projection model. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2004, 271:425-434.
24. Metcalf C.J.E., et al. Evolution of flowering decisions in a stochastic, density-dependent environment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105:10466-10470.
25. Childs D.Z., et al. Predicting trait values and measuring selection in complex life histories: reproductive allocation decisions in Soay sheep. Ecol. Lett. 2011, 14:985-992.
26. Childs D.Z., et al. Evolution of complex flowering strategies: an age- and size-structured integral projection model. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2003, 270:1829-1838.
27. Visser M.E., Both C. Shifts in phenology due to global climate change: the need for a yardstick. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2005, 272:2561-2569.
28. Childs D.Z., et al. Evolution of size-dependent flowering in a variable environment: construction and analysis of a stochastic integral projection model. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2010, 271:425-434.
29. Coulson T., Tuljapurkar S. The dynamics of a quantitative trait in an age-structured population living in a variable environment. Am. Nat. 2008, 172:599-612.
30. Adler P.B., et al. Coexistence of perennial plants: an embarrassment of niches. Ecol. Lett. 2010, 13:1019-2029.
31. Geritz S.A.H., et al. Evolutionarily singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree. Evol. Ecol. 1998, 12:35-57.
32. Rees M., et al. Seed dormancy and delayed flowering in monocarpic plants: selective interactions in a stochastic environment. Am. Nat. 2006, 168:E53-E71.