Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
snippets [2013/02/28 10:25] – [Gradual change] mkoppsnippets [2019/03/21 09:21] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 13: Line 13:
   * Make qualitative predictions about the effect of different environmental and genetic variables.   * Make qualitative predictions about the effect of different environmental and genetic variables.
   * Provide rough rules of thumb for the magnitude of genetic (but not plastic, wee above) changes.   * Provide rough rules of thumb for the magnitude of genetic (but not plastic, wee above) changes.
-  * Make suggestions about measurements and scaling (e.g. Herford et al. 2004, Hansen and Houle 2008, Gingerich 2009)+  * Make suggestions about measurements and scaling (e.g. Hereford et al. 2004, Hansen and Houle 2008, Gingerich 2009)
  
 == Outline == == Outline ==
Line 36: Line 36:
 </latex> </latex>
  
-Here, z is the phenotype of an individual, theta_t is the optimum at time t, and the "variance" sigma^2 measures the width of the fitness function (i.e., selection is strong sigma^2 is small). Here and later on, our notation mainly follows ... (Bürger and Lynch 1995?). Frequently, it is assumed that, at time 0, z = theta_0, that is, the population is perfectly adapted before the optimum stops moving. Movement of the optimum is typically assumed to the linear, potentially accompanied by stochastic white noise:+Here, z is the phenotype of an individual, theta_t is the optimum at time t, and the "variance" sigma^2 measures the width of the fitness function (i.e., selection is strong sigma^2 is small). Here and later on, our notation mainly follows ... (Bürger and Lynch 1995?). Frequently, it is assumed that, at time 0, z = theta_0, that is, the population is perfectly adapted before the optimum starts moving. Movement of the optimum is typically assumed to be linear, potentially accompanied by stochastic white noise:
  
 <latex> <latex>
Line 44: Line 44:
 where <latex>\epsilon_t</latex> is drawn from a normal distribution with mean 0 and variance <latex>\sigma_\theta^2</latex>. Setting <latex>\sigma_\theta^2 = 0</latex> recovers the deterministic case. This basic model has first(?) been analyzed by Lynch and Lande (1993) using a quantitative genetic framework, and later been extended by Bürger and Lynch (1995), ... Since its behavior is highly instructive, we will describe it in some detail.  where <latex>\epsilon_t</latex> is drawn from a normal distribution with mean 0 and variance <latex>\sigma_\theta^2</latex>. Setting <latex>\sigma_\theta^2 = 0</latex> recovers the deterministic case. This basic model has first(?) been analyzed by Lynch and Lande (1993) using a quantitative genetic framework, and later been extended by Bürger and Lynch (1995), ... Since its behavior is highly instructive, we will describe it in some detail. 
  
-Assume that the trait z has a polygenic basis +Assume that the trait z has a polygenic basis. In the simplest case (additive genetics, no plasticity), its variance can be decomposed into <latex>\sigma_p^2 = \sigma_g^2 + \sigma_e^2</latex>, where <latex>\sigma_p^2</latex> is the phenotypic variance, <latex>\sigma_g^2</latex> is the additive genetic variance, and <latex>\sigma_e^2</latex> is the environmental variance (variation due to developmental instability or micro-environmental fluctuations). Assuming non-overlapping generations, evolution of the mean phenotype can be described by  
 + 
 +<latex> 
 +\Delta \bar z = \sigma_g^2 \beta 
 +</latex> 
 + 
 +where the selection gradient <latex>\beta</latex> is given by 
 + 
 +<latex> 
 +\beta = \frac{d \ln \bar w}{d \bar z}. 
 +</latex> 
 + 
 +<latex>\beta</latex> measures the proportional change in mean fitness per unit change of the mean phenotype. With the Gaussian fitness function given above 
 + 
 +<latex> 
 +\beta = \frac{\bar z - \theta_t}{\sigma_s^2 + \sigma_e^2}, 
 +</latex> 
 + 
 +that is, the selection gradient increases linearly over time. As the optimum starts moving, an initially well-adapted population (z = \theta_0 = 0) will start to evolve, but initially, the selection gradient is small and, hence, the rate of adaptation is smaller than the rate of environmental change and the population will gradually slip off the optimum. However, as the distance to the optimum increases, so does the selection gradient, until finally a state of dynamic equilibrium is reached at which the rate of evolution exactly matches the rate of environmental change. At this equilibrium 
 + 
 +<latex> 
 +\Delta \bar z^* = ... 
 +</latex> 
 + 
 +Even if the genetic variance is assumed to be constant, whether or not the population can actually follow the optimum depends on the population growth rate (mean fitness) at the equilibrium. The mean fitness can be decomposed into 
 + 
 +<latex> 
 +\bar w_t = w_{max} - l_g - l_d 
 +</latex>
 === Multivariate case === === Multivariate case ===