Testing the matching habitat choice hypothesis in nature: phenotype-environment correlation and fitness in a songbird population

Abstract

The matching habitat choice hypothesis holds that individuals with different phenotypes actively select the habitats to which they are best adapted, hence maximizing fitness. Despite the potential implications of matching habitat choice for many ecological and evolutionary processes, very few studies have tested its predictions. Here, we use a 26year dataset on a spatially structured population of pied flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) to test whether phenotype-dependent dispersal and habitat selection translate into increased fitness, as measured by recruitment success. In our study system, males at the extremes of the body size range segregate into deciduous and coniferous forests through nonrandom dispersal. According to the matching habitat choice hypothesis, fitness of large-sized males is expected to be higher in the deciduous habitat, where they preferentially settle to breed, while the reverse would be true for small-sized males, which are more frequent in the coniferous forest. Our results showed that recruitment success in the coniferous forest increased non-linearly with body size, with males at the middle of the size range having higher fitness than both large and small-sized males. However, no clear trend was observed in the deciduous forest where males of either size had similar fitness. After empirically discarding other important processes potentially confounding matching habitat choice, as genotype-and body condition-dependent dispersal, competitive exclusion remains the most likely force shaping the nonrandom distribution of male pied flycatchers. A conclusive demonstration of the operation and occurrence of matching habitat choice in nature remains therefore to be done.

Comparing the consequences of natural selection, adaptive phenotypic plasticity, and matching habitat choice for phenotype–environment matching, population genetic structure, and reproductive isolation in meta‐populations

“…Alternatively, the existence of matching habitat choice may be underestimated in natural systems because without manipulation of the phenotypes and observing the consequences for dispersal, observed local environment‐phenotype matching as those depicted in our figures may be mistakenly interpreted as typical outputs of plasticity or natural selection (Figure ; Camacho, Canal, & Potti, ; Edelaar & Bolnick, ). Given that matching habitat choice may still operate when plasticity is constrained, and that it favors the maintenance of genetic variation and the evolution of reproductive isolation, it is very worthwhile to consider whether matching habitat choice might have contributed to patterns of observed local adaptation, and if so to test for matching habitat choice empirically.…”

Long‐term occupancy of nest boxes as a measure of territory quality for Pied Flycatchers

“…Songbird reproduction has been monitored in the two habitats over 22 yr (1995–2017), except for 2003 when sampling was limited (e.g., Camacho et al. , , , ).…”

“…), so that the breeding success of all males might be similar regardless of their morphology (Camacho et al. ).…”

Evolution of dispersal strategies and dispersal syndromes in fragmented landscapes

“…conditional) dispersal syndromes (McPeek and Holt 1992, Cote and Clobert 2007a, Edelaar et al 2008, Clobert et al 2009). Context-dependent dispersal syndromes at the departure and settlement phases have been documented in several species (MacCallum et al 1998, Byers 2000, Gilliam and Fraser 2001, Cote and Clobert 2007a, 2007b, Bonte et al 2008, Bolnick et al 2009, Cote et al 2013, Maes et al 2013, Pennekamp et al 2014, Bestion et al 2015b, Camacho et al 2015, Myles-Gonzalez et al 2015, Wey et al 2015, Jacob et al 2016. For example, Pennekamp et al (2014) investigated the role of genotype and environment interactions on dispersal propensity in a ciliate.…”