Microevolution in Island Forms: The Roles of Drift and Directional Selection in Morphological Divergence of a Passerine Bird

Abstract

.— Theory predicts that in small isolated populations random genetic drift can lead to phenotypic divergence; however this prediction has rarely been tested quantitatively in natural populations. Here we utilize natural repeated island colonization events by members of the avian species complex, Zosterops lateralis, to assess whether or not genetic drift alone is an adequate explanation for the observed patterns of microevolutionary divergence in morphology. Morphological and molecular genetic characteristics of island and mainland populations are compared to test three predictions of drift theory: (1) that the pattern of morphological change is idiosyncratic to each island; (2) that there is concordance between morphological and neutral genetic shifts across island populations; and (3) for populations whose time of colonization is known, that the rate of morphological change is sufficiently slow to be accounted for solely by genetic drift. Our results are not consistent with these predictions. First, the direction of size shifts was consistently towards larger size, suggesting the action of a nonrandom process. Second, patterns of morphological divergence among recently colonized populations showed little concordance with divergence in neutral genetic characters. Third, rate tests of morphological change showed that effective population sizes were not small enough for random processes alone to account for the magnitude of microevolutionary change. Altogether, these three lines of evidence suggest that drift alone is not an adequate explanation of morphological differentiation in recently colonized island Zosterops and therefore we suggest that the observed microevolutionary changes are largely a result of directional natural selection.

Evolution along the Great Rift Valley: phenotypic and genetic differentiation of East African white‐eyes (Aves, Zosteropidae)

“…However, the combination of both phenotypic and genetic data can help to distinguish differentiation resulting from neutral stochastic processes caused by geographic isolation and selective processes driven by local environmental conditions (Clegg et al. 2002; McKay and Latta 2002; Leinonen et al. 2006, 2008, 2013; Sæther et al.…”

Evolutionary patterns of diversification in the Andean hummingbird genus Adelomyia

“…While such interspecific analyses are valuable to understand diversification, few studies have examined the patterns and processes at the intraspecific level. Intraspecific studies that explore the geographic distributions of lineages and fitness-related traits can be particularly valuable in understanding the proximate mechanisms driving diversification (Moritz et al, 2000;Puorto et al, 2001;Nicholls and Austin, 2005;Smith et al, 2005;Schneider and Moritz, 1999;Clegg et al, 2002;Chaves et al, 2007).…”

Genomics and ornithology

“…But, even with the large estimates of ancestral population size in Poephila, drift S30 J Ornithol (2007) 148 (Suppl 1):S27-S33 cannot be ignored. What is needed now are further examples in which the relative roles of drift and selection during speciation can be determined, and an evaluation of the prevalence of both forces in causing divergence (Clegg et al 2002). A multilocus approach, facilitated no doubt by genomics, will surely play an important role in this evaluation.…”