Natural selection on body size is mediated by multiple interacting factors: A comparison of beetle populations varying naturally and experimentally in body size

Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 1-14

  Amarillo Suárez, Angela R ^a   Stillwell, R Craig ^b   Fox, Charles W ^c  

^a PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD JAVERIANA   (Colombia)

^b University of Houston   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial selection; Body size; Fitness; Scramble competition; Seed beetle; Stator limbatus

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; BRUCHINAE; COLEOPTERA; STATOR LIMBATUS;

EID: 84885851139     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20457758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.1     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Amarillo-Súarez, A. R. and C.W. Fox. 2006. Population differences in host use by a seed-beetle-local adaptation, phenotypic plasticity and maternal effects. Oecologia 150, 247-258.
2. Atkinson, W. D. 1979. A field investigation of larval competition in domestic Drosophila. J. Anim. Ecol. 48, 91-102.
3. Berger, D., R. Walters, and K. Gotthard. 2006.What keeps insects small? Size dependent predation on two species of butterfly larvae. Evol. Ecol. 20, 575-289.
4. Blanckenhorn, W. U. 2000. The evolution of body size: what keeps organisms small? Q. Rev. Biol. 75, 385-407.
5. Blanckenhorn, W. U. 2005. Behavioral causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethology 111, 977-1016.
6. Blanckenhorn, W. U., R. C. Stillwell, K. A. Young, C.W. Fox, and K. G. Ashton. 2006.When Rensch meets Bergmann: does sexual size dimorphism change systematically with latitude? Evolution 60, 2004-2011.
7. Bonal, R. and A. Muñoz. 2009. Seed weevils living on the edge: pressures and conflicts over body size in the endoparasitic Curculio larvae. Ecol. Ent. 34, 304-309.
8. Borash, D. J. and G. T. Ho. 2001. Patterns of selection: stress resistance and energy storage in density-dependent populations of Drosophila melanogaster. J. Insect Physiol. 47, 1349-1356.
9. Boyce, M. S. 1978. Climatic variability and body size variation in the muskrats (Ondatra zibethicus) of North America. Oecologia 36, 1-19.
10. Briffa, M. and L. Sneddon. 2010. Contest behavior. In: D.F. Westneat and C.W. Fox, editors. Evolutionary Behavioral Ecology. Oxford Univ. Press, New York, NY. Pp. 246-265.
11. Brodeur, J. andBoivin, G. 2004. Functional ecology of immature parasitoids. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 49, 27-49.
12. Brown, J. H., J. F. Gillooly, A. P. Allen, V. M. Savage, and G. B. West. 2004. Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85, 1771-1789.
13. Center, T. D. and C. D. Johnson. 1974. Coevolution of some seed beetles (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) and their hosts. Ecology 55, 1096-1103.
14. Chown, S. J. and K. J. Gaston. 2010. Body size variation in insects: a macroecological perspective. Biol. Rev. 85, 139-169.
15. Colegrave, N. 1995. The cost of exploitation competition on Callosobruchus beetles. Funct. Ecol. 9, 191-196.
16. Cornelissena, T. and P. Stiling. 2008. Clumped distribution of oak leaf miners between and within plants. Bas. Appl. Ecol. 9, 67-77.
17. Cortese, M. D., F. M. Norry, R. Piccinali, and E. Hasson. 2002. Direct and correlated responses to artificial selection on developmental time and wing length in Drosophila buzzatii. Evolution 56, 2541-2547.
18. Davidowitz, G. 2008. Population and environmental effects on the size-fecundity relationship in a common grasshopper across an aridity gradient. J. Orthopt. Res. 17, 265-71.
19. Dickason, E. A. 1960. Mortality factors for the vetch bruchid, Bruchus brachialis. J. Econ. Entomol. 53, 555-558.
20. Fairbairn, D. J. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28, 659-687.
21. Fox, C.W. 1997. The ecology of body size in a seed beetle, Stator limbatus: persistence of environmental variation across generations? Evolution 51, 1005-1010.
22. Fox, C.W. and M. E. Czesak. 2006. Selection on body size and sexual size dimorphism differs between host species in a seed-feeding beetle. J. Evol. Biol. 19, 1167-1174.
23. Fox, C.W. and U. M. Savalli. 1998. Inheritance of environmental variation in body size: superparasitism of seeds affects progeny and grandprogeny body size via a non-genetic maternal effect. Evolution 52, 172-182.
24. Fox, C.W., M. L. Bush, D. A. Roff, and W. G. Wallin. 2004. Evolutionary genetics of lifespan and mortality rates in two populations of the seed beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus. Heredity 92, 170-181.
25. Fox, C.W., J. D. Martin, M. S. Thakar, and T. A. Mousseau. 1996. Clutch size manipulations in two seed beetles, Stator limbatus and S. beali: consequences for progeny fitness. Oecologia 108, 88-94.
26. Fox, C.W., K. J. Waddell, and T. A. Mousseau. 1995. Parental host plant affects offspring life histories in a seed beetle. Ecology 76, 402-411.
27. Guedes, R. N. C., N. M. P. Guedes, and Smith, R. H. 2007. Larval competition within seeds: from the behaviour process to the ecological outcome in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Aust. Ecol. 32, 697-707.
28. Grimaldi, D. and J. Jaenike. 1984. Competition in natural populations of mycophagous Drosophila. Ecology 65, 1113-1120.
29. Hardy, I. C.W., N. T. Griffiths, and H. C. J. Godfray. 1992. Clutch size in a parasitoid wasp: a manipulation experiment. J. Anim. Ecol. 61, 121-129.
30. Ho, C. K, S. C. Pennings, and T. H. Carefoot. 2010. Is diet quality an overlooked mechanism for Bergmann's Rule? Am. Nat. 175, 269-276.
31. Honek, A. 1993. Intraspecific variation in body size and fecundity in insects: a general relationship. Oikos 66, 483-92.
32. Huey, R. B., G.W. Gilchrist, M. L. Carlson, D. Berrigan, and L. Serra. 2000. Rapid evolution of a geographic cline in size in an introduced fly. Science 287, 308-309.
33. Johnson, C. D. and J. M. Kingsolver. 1976. Systematics of Stator of North and Central America (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). USDA Tech. Bull. 1537, 1-101.
34. Johnson, C. D., J. M. Kingsolver, and A. L. Teran. 1989. Sistematica del genero Stator (Insecta: Coleoptera: Bruchidae) en Sudamerica. Opera Lilloana 37, 1-105.
35. Joshi, A. 1997. Laboratory studies of density-dependent selection: adaptations to crowding in Drosophila melanogaster. Curr. Sci. 72, 555-561.
36. Kingsolver, J. G. and S. E. Diamond. 2011. Phenotypic selection in natural populations: what limits directional selection? Am. Nat. 177, 346-357.
37. Levins, R. 1969. Thermal acclimation and heat resistance in Drosophila species. Am. Nat. 103, 483-499.
38. Lindstedt, S. L. and M. S. Boyce. 1985. Seasonality, fasting endurance, and body size in mammals. Am. Nat. 125, 873-878.
39. Mackauer, M. and A. Chau. 2001. Adaptive self superparasitism in a solitary parasitoid wasp: the influence of clutch size on offspring size. Funct. Ecol. 15, 335-343.
40. McCabe, J. and L. Partridge. 1997. An interaction between environmental temperature and genetic variation for body size for the fitness of adult female Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 51, 1164-1174.
41. Messina, F. J. 1991. Life-history variation in a seed beetle: adult egg-laying vs. larval competitive ability. Oecologia 85, 447-455.
42. Messina, F. J. 2004. Predictable modification of body size and competitive ability following a host shift by a seed beetle. Evolution 58, 2788-2797.
43. Messina, F. J. and T. R. Tinney 1991. Discrimination between 'self ' and 'non-self ' eggs by egg-laying seed beetles: a reassessment. Ecol. Entomol. 16, 509-512.
44. Mitchell, R. 1977. Bruchid beetles and seed packaging by palo verde. Ecology 58, 644-651.
45. Morse, G. E. 2005. Interspecific phylogeography of the Stator limbatus species complex: the geographic context of speciation and specialization. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 36, 201-213.
46. Morse, G. E. and B. D. Farrell. 2005. Ecological and evolutionary diversification of the seed beetle genus Stator (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Bruchinae). Evolution 59, 1315-1333.
47. Moya-Laraño, J., M. El Tigani El-Sayyid and C.W. Fox. 2007. Smaller beetles are better scramble competitors at cooler temperatures. Biol. Lett. 3, 475-478.
48. Mueller, L. D. 1997. Theoretical and empirical examination of density-dependent selection. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28, 269-288.
49. Ofuya, T. I. and S. O. Agele. 1989. Ability of ovipositing C. maculatus female to discriminate between seeds bearing their on eggs from those bearing eggs of other females. Ecol. Entomol. 14, 243-246.
50. Partridge, L. and K. Fowler. 1993. Responses and correlated responses to artificial selection on thorax length in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 47, 213-226.
51. Pérez, A., and C. García. 2002. Evolutionary responses of Drosophila melanogaster to selection at different larval densities: changes in genetic variation, specialization and phenotypic plasticity. J. Evol. Biol. 15, 524-536.
52. Peters, R. H. 1983. The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, New York.
53. Petitt, F. L. and D. O. Wietlisbach. 1993. Effects of host instar and size on parasitization efficiency and life history parameters of Opius dissitus. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 66, 227-236.
54. Preziosi, R. F., D. J. Fairbairn, D. A. Roff, and M. J. Brennan. 1996. Body size and fecundity in the waterstrider Aquarius remigis: a test of Darwin's fecundity advantage hypothesis. Oecologia 108, 424-31.
55. Prout, T. and F. McChesney. 1985. Competition among immatures affects their adult fertility: population dynamics. Am. Nat. 126, 521-558.
56. Reeve, M.W., K. Fowler, and L. Partridge. 2000. Increased body size confers greater fitness at lower experimental temperature in male Drosophila melanogaster. J. Evol. Biol. 13, 836-844.
57. Reim, C., Y. Teuschl, and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2006. Size-dependent effects of larval and adult food availability on reproductive energy allocation in the yellow dung fly. Funct. Ecol. 20, 1012-1021.
58. Remmel, T. and T. Tammaru. 2009. Size-dependent predation risk in tree-feeding insects with different colouration strategies: a field experiment. J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 973-980.
59. Roper, C., P. Pignatelli, andL. Partridge. 1996. Evolutionary responses of Drosophila melanogaster life history to differences in larval density. J. Evol. Biol. 9, 609-622.
60. Sanders, A. E., C. Scarborough, M. Hopkins, S. Layen S, A. R. Kraaijeveld, andH. C. J. Godfray. 2005. Evolutionary change in parasitoid resistance under crowded conditions in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 59, 1292-1299.
61. Santos, M., K. Fowler, andL. Partridge. 1992. On the use of tester stocks to predict the competitive ability of genotypes. Heredity 69, 489-495.
62. Santos, M., K. Fowler, and L. Partridge. 1994. Gene-environment interaction for body size and larval density in Drosophila melanogaster: an investigation of effects on development time, thorax length and adult sex ratio. Heredity 72, 515-521.
63. Santos, M., D. J. Borash, A. Joshi, N. Bounlutay, and L. D. Mueller. 1997. Density-dependent natural selection in Drosophila: evolution of growth rate and body size. Evolution 51, 420-432.
64. Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 1984. Scaling: why is animal size so important? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
65. Simmons, L.W. 1987. Competition between larvae of the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (Orthoptera: Gryllidae) and its effects on some life-history components of fitness. J. Anim. Ecol. 56, 1015-1027.
66. Smallegange, I. M. and T. Tregenza. 2008. Local competition between foraging relatives: growth and survival of bruchid beetle larvae. J. Insect Behav. 21, 375-386.
67. Smith, R. H. and C. M. Lessells. 1985. Oviposition, ovicide and larval competition in granivorous insects. In: R.M. Sibly and R.H. Smith, editors. Behavioural ecology: ecological consequences of adaptive behavior. Blackwell, Oxford. pp. 423-448.
68. Stanton, M. L. and D. A. Thiede. 2005. Statistical convenience vs biological insight: consequences of data transformation for the analysis of fitness variation in heterogeneous environments. New Phytol. 166, 319-338.
69. Stillwell, R. C. 2010. Are latitudinal clines in body size adaptive? Oikos 119, 1387-1390.
70. Stillwell, R. C. and C.W. Fox. 2007. Environmental effects on sexual size dimorphism of a seed-feeding beetle. Oecologia 153, 273-280.
71. Stillwell, R. C., J. Moya-Laraño and C.W. Fox. 2008. Selection does not favor large body size at lower temperature in a seed-feeding beetle. Evolution 62, 2534-2544.
72. Stillwell, R. C., G. E. Morse, and C.W. Fox. 2007a. Geographic variation in body size and sexual size dimorphism of a seed-feeding beetle. Am. Nat. 170, 358-369.
73. Stillwell, R. C., W. G. Wallin, L. J. Hitchcock, and C.W. Fox. 2007b. Phenotypic plasticity in a complex world: interactive effects of food and temperature on fitness components of a seed beetle. Oecologia 153, 309-321.
74. Stillwell, R. C., W. U. Blanckenhorn, T. Teder, G. Davidowitz, and C.W. Fox. 2010. Sex differences in phenotypic plasticity affect variation in sexual size dimorphism in insects: from physiology to evolution. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 55, 227-245.
75. Szentesi, A. 2003. Resource assessment and clutch size in the bean weevil, Acanthoscelides obtectus. Pest Manag. Sci. 59, 431-436.
76. Teuschl, Y., C. Reim, and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2007. Correlated responses to artificial body size selection in growth, development, phenotypic plasticity and juvenile viability in yellow dung flies. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 87-103.
77. Thomas, R. H. 1993. Ecology of body size in Drosophila buzzatii: untangling the effects of temperature and nutrition. Ecol. Entomol. 18, 84-90.
78. Traynor, R. E. and P. J. Mayhew. 2005. A comparative study of body size and clutch size across the parasitoid Hymenoptera. Oikos 109, 305-316.
79. Toquenaga, Y. and K. Fuji. 1990. Contest and scramble competition in two bruchid species, Callosobruchus analis and C. phaseoli (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) I. Larval competition curves and interference mechanisms. Res. Pop. Ecol. 32, 349-363.
80. Tucic, N., O. Stojkovic, I. Gliksman, D. Milanovic, and D. Seslija. 1997. Laboratory evolution of life-history traits in the bean weevil (Acanthoscelides obtectus): the effects of density-dependent and age-specific selection. Evolution 51, 1896-1909.
81. Vamosi, S. M. 2005. Interactive effects of larval host and competition on adult fitness: an experimental test with seed beetles (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Funct. Ecol. 19, 859-864.
82. Yanagi, S. and M. Tuda. 2010. Interaction effect among maternal environment, maternal investment and progeny genotype on life history traits in Callosobruchus chinensis. Funct. Ecol. 24, 383-391.