Department Fish Ecology and Evolution

Parallel phenotypic divergence in replicated adaptive radiations could either result from parallel genetic divergence in response to similar divergent selection regimes or from equivalent phenotypically plastic response to the repeated occurrence of contrasting environments. In post-glacial fish, replicated divergence in phenotypes along the benthic-limnetic habitat axis is commonly observed. Here, we use two benthic-limnetic species pairs of whitefish from two Swiss lakes, raised in a common garden design, with reciprocal food treatments in one species pair, to experimentally measure whether feeding efficiency on benthic prey has a genetic basis or whether it underlies phenotypic plasticity (or both). To do so, we offered experimental fish mosquito larvae, partially burried in sand, and measured multiple feeding efficiency variables. Our results reveal both, genetic divergence as well as phenotypically plastic divergence in feeding efficiency, with the phenotypically benthic species raised on benthic food being the most efficient forager on benthic prey. This indicates that both, divergent natural selection on genetically heritable traits and adaptive phenotypic plasticity, are likely important mechanisms driving phenotypic divergence in adaptive radiation.

There is increasing evidence that rapid phenotypic evolution can strongly influence population dynamics, but how are such eco-evolutionary dynamics influenced by the source of trait variation (i.e., genetic variation or phenotypic plasticity)? To investigate this, we used rotifer–algae microcosm experiments to test how the phenotypic and genetic composition of prey populations affect predator–prey population dynamics. We chose four genetically distinct strains of the green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii that varied in their growth rate, standing levels of defense, and inducible defense. To additionally test for strain specificity of plasticity responses, we quantified protein expression of each strain in the presence and absence of rotifer predators (Brachionus calyciflorus). We then tested how different strain combinations influenced the outcome of pairwise competition trials with and without rotifer predation. We tracked individual strain frequencies using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), and compared the observed dynamics to a suite of eco-evolutionary models of varying complexity. We found that variation in trade-offs between growth and defense between algal strains strongly influenced the outcome of competition and the overall predator–prey dynamics. Our purely ecological model of the observed dynamics, which allowed for the presence of phenotypic plasticity but no trait variation between strains, never outperformed any of our eco-evolutionary models in which strains could have different trait values. Our best fitting eco-evolutionary model allowed strains to differ in an inducible defense trait. Overall, our results provide some of the first experimental evidence that variation in phenotypically plastic responses among prey genotypes can be an important component of eco-evolutionary dynamics in a predator–prey system.

Phenotypic differences among closely related populations and species can cause contrasting effects on ecosystems; however, it is unknown whether such effects result from genetic divergence, phenotypic plasticity, or both. To test this, we reared sympatric limnetic and benthic species of whitefish from a young adaptive radiation in a common garden, where the benthic species was raised on two distinct food types. We then used these fish in a mesocosm experiment to test for contrasting ecosystem effects of closely related species and of plastically induced differences within a species. We found that strong contrasting ecosystem effects resulted more frequently from genetic divergence, although they were not stronger overall than those resulting from phenotypic plasticity. Overall, our results provide evidence that genetically based differences among closely related species that evolved during a young adaptive radiation can affect ecosystems, and that phenotypic plasticity can modify the ecosystem effects of such species.

Summary Differences in how organisms modify their environment can evolve rapidly and might influence adaptive population divergence [1, 2]. In a common garden experiment in aquatic mesocosms, we found that adult stickleback from a recently diverged pair of lake and stream populations had contrasting effects on ecosystem metrics. These modifications were caused by both genetic and plastic differences between populations and were sometimes comparable in magnitude to those caused by the presence/absence of stickleback. Lake and stream fish differentially affected the biomass of zooplankton and phytoplankton, the concentration of phosphorus, and the abundance of several prey (e.g., copepods) and non-prey (e.g., cyanobacteria) species. The adult-mediated effects on mesocosm ecosystems influenced the survival and growth of a subsequent generation of juvenile stickleback reared in the same mesocosms. The prior presence of adults decreased the overall growth rate of juveniles, and the prior presence of stream adults lowered overall juvenile survival. Among the survivors, lake juveniles grew faster than co-occurring stream juveniles, except in mesocosm ecosystems previously modified by adult lake fish that were reared on plankton. Overall, our results provide evidence for reciprocal interactions between ecosystem dynamics and evolutionary change (i.e., eco-evolutionary feedbacks) in the early stages of adaptive population divergence.

1. Cryptic pigmentation of prey is often thought to evolve in response to predator-mediated selection, but pigmentation traits can also be plastic, and change with respect to both abiotic and biotic environmental conditions. In such cases, identifying the presence of, and drivers of trait plasticity is useful for understanding the evolution of crypsis.
2. Previous work suggests that cryptic pigmentation of freshwater isopods (Asellus aquaticus) has evolved in response to predation pressure by fish in habitats with varying macrophyte cover and coloration. However, macrophytes can potentially influence the distribution of pigmentation by altering not only habitat-specific predation susceptibility, but also dietary resources and abiotic conditions. The goals of this study were to experimentally test how two putative agents of selection, namely macrophytes and fish, affect the pigmentation of A. aquaticus, and to assess whether pigmentation is plastic, using a diet manipulation in a common garden.
3. We performed two experiments: (a) in an outdoor mesocosm experiment, we investigated how different densities of predatory fish (0/30/60 three-spined stickleback [Gasterosteus aculeatus] per mesocosm) and macrophytes (presence/absence) affected the abundance, pigmentation and body size structure of isopod populations. (b) In a subsequent laboratory experiment, we reared isopods in a common garden experiment on two different food sources (high/low protein content) to test whether variation in pigmentation of isopods can be explained by diet-based developmental plasticity.
4. We found that fish presence strongly reduced isopod densities, particularly in the absence of macrophytes, but had no effect on pigmentation or size structure of the populations. However, we found that isopods showed consistently higher pigmentation in the presence of macrophytes, regardless of fish presence or absence. Our laboratory experiment, in which we manipulated the protein content of the isopods' diet, revealed strong plasticity of pigmentation and weak plasticity of growth rate.
5. The combined results of both experiments suggest that pigmentation of A. aquaticus is a developmentally plastic trait and that multiple environmental factors (e.g. macrophytes, diet and predation) might jointly influence the evolution of cryptic pigmentation of A. aquaticus in nature on relatively short time-scales.