Evolution of phenotypic plasticity: where are we going now?

Pigliucci, Massimo

doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.06.001

Cited by 1,027 publications

(928 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

902

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The strength of this selection would of course depend on how variable the environment actually is, but for the capacity for phenotypic plasticity to evolve as a lifehistory strategy, significant environmental variability is necessary. This is because plasticity itself may well carry some costs, and hence would not be favoured by natural selection if the environment were stable (Pigliucci 2005). Figure 2d is a combination of the silver spoon and the environmental matching models, and may in fact be a better representation of the thrifty phenotype concept.…”

Section: The Interaction Between Developmental and Adult Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early growth conditions, phenotypic development and environmental change

Monaghan

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

843

943

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phenotypic development is the result of a complex interplay involving the organism's own genetic make-up and the environment it experiences during development. The latter encompasses not just the current environment, but also indirect, and sometimes lagged, components that result from environmental effects on its parents that are transmitted to their developing offspring in various ways and at various stages. These environmental effects can simply constrain development, for example, where poor maternal condition gives rise to poorly provisioned, low-quality offspring. However, it is also possible that environmental circumstances during development shape the offspring phenotype in such a way as to better prepare it for the environmental conditions it is most likely to encounter during its life. Studying the extent to which direct and indirect developmental responses to environmental effects are adaptive requires clear elucidation of hypotheses and careful experimental manipulations. In this paper, I outline how the different paradigms applied in this field relate to each other, the main predictions that they produce and the kinds of experimental data needed to distinguish among competing hypotheses. I focus on birds in particular, but the theories discussed are not taxon specific. Environmental influences on phenotypic development are likely to be mediated, in part at least, by endocrine systems. I examine evidence from mechanistic and functional avian studies and highlight the general areas where we lack key information.

show abstract

Section: The Interaction Between Developmental and Adult Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early growth conditions, phenotypic development and environmental change

Monaghan

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

843

943

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be particularly important in disturbed environments where environmental variation is frequent (Daehler, 2003). Adaptive plasticity in colonizing populations may also provide a temporal buffer prior to directional and local selection (Ghalambor, Mc Kay, Carroll, & Reznick, 2007; Pigliucci, 2005). However, empirical evidence for the role of plasticity in invasive success is contradictory, with some meta‐analyses and reviews finding no difference in plasticity between invasive and noninvasive species (Godoy, Valladares, & Castro‐Díez, 2011; Godoy, Valladares, & Castro‐Díez, 2012; Palacio‐López & Gianoli, 2011), with others finding substantial differences (Daehler, 2003; Davidson, Jennions, & Nicotra, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traits correlate with invasive success more than plasticity: A comparison of three Centaurea congeners

Montesinos

Callaway

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of phenotypic plasticity for successful invasion by exotic plant species has been well studied, but with contradictory and inconclusive results. However, many previous studies focused on comparisons of native and invasive species that co‐occur in a single invaded region, and thus on species with potentially very different evolutionary histories. We took a different approach by comparing three closely related Centaurea species: the highly invasive C. solstitialis, and the noninvasive but exotic C. calcitrapa and C. sulphurea. These species have overlapping distributions both in their native range of Spain and in their non‐native range of California. We collected seeds from 3 to 10 populations from each region and species and grew them in common garden greenhouse conditions to obtain an F1 generation in order to reduce maternal effects. Then, F1 seeds were grown subjected to simulated herbivory, variation in nutrient availability, and competition, to explore plasticity in the responses to these conditions. We found little variation in phenotypic plasticity among species and regions, but C. solstitialis plants from California produced more biomass in competition than their Spanish conspecifics. This species also had the highest relative growth rates when in competition and when grown under low nutrient availability. Noninvasive congeners produced intermediate or opposite patterns.

show abstract

“…As phenotypic plasticity appears to be the most likely mechanism by which breeding parameters change with 164 climate, as demonstrated in the closely-related collared flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis), and also in great tits (Przybylo et al 2000;Charmantier et al 2008), the most likely direct constraint is some limitation on phenotypic plasticity (Pigliucci, 2005). Although, at first sight, a limitation on plasticity seems unlikely given the substantial variation in lay dates (Fig 1e-f), it is possible that it is constrained because environmental stimuli for phenotypic 168 change are either unavailable for migrants (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%