Detecting genetic variants under selection using F outlier analysis (OA) and environmental association analyses (EAAs) are popular approaches that provide insight into the genetic basis of local adaptation. Despite the frequent use of OA and EAA approaches and their increasing attractiveness for detecting signatures of selection, their application to field-based empirical data have not been synthesized. Here, we review 66 empirical studies that use Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) in OA and EAA. We report trends and biases across biological systems, sequencing methods, approaches, parameters, environmental variables and their influence on detecting signatures of selection. We found striking variability in both the use and reporting of environmental data and statistical parameters. For example, linkage disequilibrium among SNPs and numbers of unique SNP associations identified with EAA were rarely reported. The proportion of putatively adaptive SNPs detected varied widely among studies, and decreased with the number of SNPs analysed. We found that genomic sampling effort had a greater impact than biological sampling effort on the proportion of identified SNPs under selection. OA identified a higher proportion of outliers when more individuals were sampled, but this was not the case for EAA. To facilitate repeatability, interpretation and synthesis of studies detecting selection, we recommend that future studies consistently report geographical coordinates, environmental data, model parameters, linkage disequilibrium, and measures of genetic structure. Identifying standards for how OA and EAA studies are designed and reported will aid future transparency and comparability of SNP-based selection studies and help to progress landscape and evolutionary genomics.

No abstract

Deimatic or 'startle' displays cause a receiver to recoil reflexively in response to a sudden change in sensory input. Deimatism is sometimes implicitly treated as a form of aposematism (unprofitability associated with a signal). However, the fundamental difference is, in order to provide protection, deimatism does not require a predator to have any learned or innate aversion. Instead, deimatism can confer a survival advantage by exploiting existing neural mechanisms in a way that releases a reflexive response in the predator. We discuss the differences among deimatism, aposematism, and forms of mimicry, and their ecological and evolutionary implications. We highlight outstanding questions critical to progress in understanding deimatism.

The mechanisms and functions of reversible colour change in arthropods are highly diverse despite, or perhaps due to, the presence of an exoskeleton. Physiological colour changes, which have been recorded in 90 arthropod species, are rapid and are the result of changes in the positioning of microstructures or pigments, or in the refractive index of layers in the integument. By contrast, morphological colour changes, documented in 31 species, involve the anabolism or catabolism of components (e.g. pigments) directly related to the observable colour. In this review we highlight the diversity of mechanisms by which reversible colour change occurs and the evolutionary context and diversity of arthropod taxa in which it has been observed. Further, we discuss the functions of reversible colour change so far proposed, review the limited behavioural and ecological data, and argue that the field requires phylogenetically controlled approaches to understanding the evolution of reversible colour change. Finally, we encourage biologists to explore new model systems for colour change and to engage scientists from other disciplines; continued cross-disciplinary collaboration is the most promising approach to this nexus of biology, physics, and chemistry.

Although females rarely experience strong mate limitation, delays or lifelong problems of mate acquisition are detrimental to female fitness. In systems where males search for females via pheromone plumes, it is often difficult to assess whether female signaling is costly. Direct costs include the energetics of pheromone production and attention from unwanted eavesdroppers, such as parasites, parasitoids, and predators. Suboptimal outcomes are also possible from too many or too few mating events or near-simultaneous arrival of males who make unwanted mating attempts (even if successfully thwarted). We show that, in theory, even small costs can lead to a scenario where young females signal less intensely (lower pheromone concentration and/or shorter time spent signaling) and increase signaling effort only as they age and gather evidence (while still virgin) on whether sperm limitation threatens their reproductive success. Our synthesis of the empirical data available on Lepidoptera supports this prediction for one frequently reported component of signalingtime spent calling (often reported as the time of onset of calling at night)-but not for another, pheromone titer. This difference is explicable under the plausible but currently untested assumption that signaling earlier than other females each night is a more reliable way of increasing the probability of acquiring at least one mate than producing a more concentrated pheromone plume. Submitted February 24, 2014; Accepted October 3, 2014; Electronically published February 2, 2015 Online enhancement: appendix.abstract: Although females rarely experience strong mate limitation, delays or lifelong problems of mate acquisition are detrimental to female fitness. In systems where males search for females via pheromone plumes, it is often difficult to assess whether female signaling is costly. Direct costs include the energetics of pheromone production and attention from unwanted eavesdroppers, such as parasites, parasitoids, and predators. Suboptimal outcomes are also possible from too many or too few mating events or near-simultaneous arrival of males who make unwanted mating attempts (even if successfully thwarted). We show that, in theory, even small costs can lead to a scenario where young females signal less intensely (lower pheromone concentration and/or shorter time spent signaling) and increase signaling effort only as they age and gather evidence (while still virgin) on whether sperm limitation threatens their reproductive success. Our synthesis of the empirical data available on Lepidoptera supports this prediction for one frequently reported component of signaling-time spent calling (often reported as the time of onset of calling at night)-but not for another, pheromone titer. This difference is explicable under the plausible but currently untested assumption that signaling earlier than other females each night is a more reliable way of increasing the probability of acquiring at least one mate than producing a more concentrated pheromone plume.

Figure 1). We use deimatic displays (sensu Maldonado) as an umbrella term that includes those that are observed through vision. The broader term, deimatic behaviour, may include other sensory modalities. Isn't this just a variant of aposematism? And how does it relate to camouflage?In some ways, deimatic displays are a combination of aposematism and camouflage, but importantly, they also include an element of surprise, which the other two do not have. Classically, aposematic animals are conspicuously coloured to warn a potential predator that they are unprofitable as prey. Unlike aposematic displays, which are mostly static and perpetually 'switched-on', in deimatic displays revealing the visual cue (or signal) is a choice or a reflex (e.g. uken reflex in amphibians; Figure 1E).At rest, animals with deimatic displays are often camouflaged and

No abstract

No abstract