How Repeatable Is Adaptive Evolution? The Role of Geographical Origin and Founder Effects in Laboratory Adaptation

Abstract

The importance of contingency versus predictability in evolution has been a long-standing issue, particularly the interaction between genetic background, founder effects, and selection. Here we address experimentally the effects of genetic background and founder events on the repeatability of laboratory adaptation in Drosophila subobscura populations for several functional traits.We found disparate starting points for adaptation among laboratory populations derived from independently sampled wild populations for all traits. With respect to the subsequent evolutionary rate during laboratory adaptation, starvation resistance varied considerably among foundations such that the outcome of laboratory evolution is rather unpredictable for this particular trait, even in direction. In contrast, the laboratory evolution of traits closely related to fitness was less contingent on the circumstances of foundation. These findings suggest that the initial laboratory evolution of weakly selected characters may be unpredictable, even when the key adaptations under evolutionary domestication are predictable with respect to their trajectories.Adaptation, Drosophila subobscura, evolutionary contingency, founder effects, genetic background, life-history traits, repeatability.

Physiological climatic limits inDrosophila: patterns and implications

“…Interactions detected between adult stress resistance and larval development as well as resistance to both these stresses and early fecundity (Mori and Kimura, 2008;Telonis-Scott et al, 2006) have turned out to be weak or undetectable in other experiments where resistance has been selected Bubliy and Loeschcke, 2005;MacMillan et al, 2009). Even when related sets of lines are exposed to the same selection pressure, patterns of correlated responses and evolutionary trajectories can be inconsistent (Simoes et al, 2008).…”

Metabolic correlates of selection on aerobic capacity in laboratory mice:a test of the model for the evolution of endothermy

“…There are at least two major reasons why testing the aerobic capacity model by this approach may prove equivocal. First, the components of variance/covariance matrices not only differ between species but also may vary between populations of the same species (Lynch and Walsh, 1998;Simões et al, 2008). Thus, the results of quantitative genetic analyses may not be repeatable across species and populations.…”

Founder effects initiated rapid species radiation in Hawaiian cave planthoppers

“…Repeated attempts to test Carson's and Templeton's concepts in the laboratory yielded ambiguous results (36)(37)(38), although a statistical reanalysis of the individual experimental results found strong support for the predictions made by this founder concept (8). However, these findings are difficult to interpret with respect to the role of founder effects in evolution because this can only be tested using a natural population with an undisturbed mating system.…”