Contents 343I.343II.343III.347IV.348348References348 Summary There is renewed interest in how transgenerational environmental effects, including epigenetic inheritance, contribute to adaptive evolution. The contribution of across‐generation plasticity to adaptation, however, needs to be evaluated within the context of within‐generation plasticity, which is often proposed to contribute more efficiently to adaptation because of the potentially greater accuracy of progeny than parental cues to predict progeny selective environments. We highlight recent empirical studies of transgenerational plasticity, and find that they do not consistently support predictions based on the higher predictive ability of progeny environmental cues. We discuss these findings within the context of the relative predictive ability of maternal and progeny cues, costs and constraints of plasticity in parental and progeny generations, and the dynamic nature of the adaptive value of within‐ and across‐generation plasticity that varies with the process of adaptation itself. Such contingent and dynamically variable selection could account for the diversity of patterns of within‐ and across‐generation plasticity observed in nature, and can influence the adaptive value of the persistence of environmental effects across generations.

SummaryGermination timing influences plant fitness, and its sensitivity to temperature may cause it to change as climate shifts. These changes are likely to be complex because temperatures that occur during seed maturation and temperatures that occur post-dispersal interact to define germination timing.We used the model organism Arabidopsis thaliana to determine how flowering time (which defines seed-maturation temperature) and post-dispersal temperature influence germination and the expression of genetic variation for germination.Germination responses to temperature (germination envelopes) changed as seeds aged, or after-ripened, and these germination trajectories depended on seed-maturation temperature and genotype. Different combinations of genotype, seed-maturation temperature, and afterripening produced similar germination envelopes. Likewise, different genotypes and seedmaturation temperatures combined to produce similar germination trajectories. Differences between genotypes were most likely to be observed at high and low germination temperatures.The germination behavior of some genotypes responds weakly to maternal temperature but others are highly plastic. We hypothesize that weak dormancy induction could synchronize germination of seeds dispersed at different times. By contrast, we hypothesize that strongly responsive genotypes may spread offspring germination over several possible germination windows. Considering germination responses to temperature is important for predicting phenology expression and evolution in future climates.

Seed dormancy can prevent germination under unfavourable conditions that reduce the chances of seedling survival. Freshly harvested seeds often have strong primary dormancy that depends on the temperature experienced by the maternal plant and which is gradually released through afterripening. However, seeds can be induced into secondary dormancy if they experience conditions or cues of future unfavourable conditions. Whether this secondary dormancy induction is influenced by seed-maturation conditions and primary dormancy has not been explored in depth. In this study, we examined secondary dormancy induction in seeds of Arabidopsis thaliana matured under different temperatures and with different levels of afterripening. We found that low water potential and a range of temperatures, from 8°C to 35°C, induced secondary dormancy. Secondary dormancy induction was affected by the state of primary dormancy of the seeds. Specifically, afterripening had a non-monotonic effect on the ability to be induced into secondary dormancy by stratification; first increasing in sensitivity as afterripening proceeded, then declining in sensitivity after 5 months of afterripening, finally increasing again by 18 months of afterripening. Seed-maturation temperature sometimes had effects that were independent of expressed primary dormancy, such that seeds that had matured at low temperature, but which had comparable germination proportions as seeds matured at warmer temperatures, were more easily induced into secondary dormancy. Because seed-maturation temperature is a cue of when seeds were matured and dispersed, these results suggest that the interaction of seed-maturation temperature, afterripening and post-dispersal conditions all combine to regulate the time of year of seed germination.

With climate change, germination cuing to water availability is expected to be especially important for seedling survival. Here, we examined germination responses to low water potential and tested whether dormancy status mediates these responses. We considered both genetically based dormancy (genotypes with allelic variation in dormancy genes) as well as dormancy imposed by the environment (low seed-maturation temperature or short duration of dry afterripening). We examined a) germination capacity at low water

Variation in the developmental timing in one life stage may ramify within and across generations to disrupt optimal phenology of other life stages. By focusing on a common mechanism of developmental arrest in plants-seed dormancy-we investigated how variation in flowering time influenced seed germination behavior and identified potential processes that can lead to canalized germination behavior despite variation in reproductive timing. We quantified effects of reproductive timing on dormancy cycling by experimentally manipulating the temperature during seed maturation and the seasonal timing of seed dispersal/burial, and by assessing temperature-dependent germination of un-earthed seeds over a seasonal cycle. We found that reproductive timing, via both seed-maturation temperature and the timing of dispersal, strongly influenced germination behavior in the weeks immediately following seed burial. However, buried seeds subsequently canalized their germination behavior, after losing primary dormancy and experiencing natural temperature and moisture conditions in the field. After the complete loss of primary dormancy, germination behavior was similar across seed-maturation and dispersal treatments, even when secondary dormancy was induced. Maternal effects themselves may contribute to the canalization of germination: first, by inducing stronger dormancy in autumn-matured seeds, and second by modifying the responses of those seeds to their ambient environment. Genotypes differed in dormancy cycling, with functional alleles of known dormancy genes necessary for the suppression of germination at warm temperatures in autumn through spring across multiple years. Loss of function of dormancy genes abolished almost all dormancy cycling. In summary, effects of reproductive phenology on dormancy cycling of buried seeds were apparent only as long as seeds retained primary dormancy, and a combination of genetically imposed seed dormancy, maternally induced seed dormancy, and secondary dormancy can mitigate variation in germination behavior imposed by variation in reproductive phenology.