Empirical tests of life‐history evolution theory using phylogenetic analysis of plant demography

Summary 1. A primary goal of evolutionary ecology is to understand factors selecting for the diversity of life histories. Life-history components, such as time-to-reproduction, adult survivorship and fecundity, might differ among species because of variation in direct and indirect benefits of these life histories in different environments or might have lower-than-expected variability because of phylogenetic constraints. Here, we present a phylogenetic examination of demography and life histories using a data base of 204 terrestrial plant species. 2. Overall, statistical models without phylogeny were preferred to models with phylogeny for vital rates and elasticities, suggesting that they lacked phylogenetic signal and are evolutionarily labile. However, the effect of phylogeny was significant in models including sensitivities, suggesting that sensitivities exhibit greater phylogenetic signal than vital rates or elasticities. 3. Species with a greater age at first reproduction had lower fecundity, consistent with a cost of delayed reproduction, but only in some habitats (e.g. grassland). We found no evidence for an indirect benefit of delayed reproduction via a decrease in variation in fecundity with age to first reproduction. 4. The greater sensitivity and lower variation in survival than in fecundity was consistent with buffering of more important vital rates, as others have also found. This suggests that studies of life-history evolution should include survival, rather than only fecundity, for the majority of species. 5. Synthesis. Demographic matrix models can provide informative tests of life-history theory because of their shared construction and outputs and their widespread use among plant ecologists. Our comparative analysis suggested that there is a cost of delayed reproduction and that more important vital rates exhibit lower variability. The absolute importance of vital rates to population growth rates (sensitivities) exhibited phylogenetic signal, suggesting that a thorough understanding of life-history evolution might require an understanding of the importance of vital rates, not just their means, and the role of phylogenetic history.

[1]  R. Salguero‐Gómez,et al.  Keeping plant shrinkage in the demographic loop , 2010 .

[2]  E. Crone,et al.  Causes and consequences of prolonged dormancy for an iteroparous geophyte, Silene spaldingii , 2007 .

[3]  C. M. Lessells,et al.  The Evolution of Life Histories , 1994 .

[4]  J. Ehrlén,et al.  How perennial are perennial plants , 2002 .

[5]  H. Wilbur,et al.  Life‐History Evolution in Uncertain Environments: Bet Hedging in Time , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[6]  D. Ackerly TAXON SAMPLING, CORRELATED EVOLUTION, AND INDEPENDENT CONTRASTS , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[7]  P. V. Tienderen,et al.  ELASTICITIES AND THE LINK BETWEEN DEMOGRAPHIC AND EVOLUTIONARY DYNAMICS , 2000 .

[8]  P. Klinkhamer,et al.  PLANT SIZE AND SEED PRODUCTION IN THE MONOCARPIC PERENNIAL CYNOGLOSSUM OFFICINALE L. , 1987, The New phytologist.

[9]  S. Stearns Trade-offs in life-history evolution , 1989 .

[10]  Per Capita,et al.  About the authors , 1995, Machine Vision and Applications.

[11]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[12]  M. Mesterton-Gibbons Why Demographic Elasticities Sum to One: A Postscript to De Kroon et al , 1993 .

[13]  Glenda M. Wardle,et al.  A GRAPH THEORY APPROACH TO DEMOGRAPHIC LOOP ANALYSIS , 1998 .

[14]  K. Shea,et al.  Trade-Offs, elasticities and the comparative method , 1994 .

[15]  E. Crone IS SURVIVORSHIP A BETTER FITNESS SURROGATE THAN FECUNDITY? , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[16]  P. Holgate,et al.  Matrix Population Models. , 1990 .

[17]  Pamela S Soltis,et al.  Darwin's abominable mystery: Insights from a supertree of the angiosperms , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  P. V. Tienderen,et al.  Life Cycle Trade-Offs in Matrix Population Models , 1995 .

[19]  Stephen P. Ellner,et al.  Simple Methods for Calculating Age‐Based Life History Parameters for Stage‐Structured Populations , 1992 .

[20]  D. Doak,et al.  HOW GENERAL ARE THE DETERMINANTS OF THE STOCHASTIC POPULATION GROWTH RATE ACROSS NEARBY SITES , 2005 .

[21]  L. Partridge,et al.  The Ecological Context of Life History Evolution , 1988, Science.

[22]  B. Kendall,et al.  Longevity can buffer plant and animal populations against changing climatic variability. , 2008, Ecology.

[23]  C. Pfister,et al.  Patterns of variance in stage-structured populations: evolutionary predictions and ecological implications. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  Korbinian Strimmer,et al.  APE: Analyses of Phylogenetics and Evolution in R language , 2004, Bioinform..

[25]  A. Grafen The phylogenetic regression. , 1989, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[26]  H. Kroon,et al.  ELASTICITIES: A REVIEW OF METHODS AND MODEL LIMITATIONS , 2000 .

[27]  T. F. Hansen,et al.  Phylogenies and the Comparative Method: A General Approach to Incorporating Phylogenetic Information into the Analysis of Interspecific Data , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[28]  Kenya lobelias Evolution of semelparity in Mount Kenya lobelias , 2007 .

[29]  Campbell O. Webb,et al.  Bioinformatics Applications Note Phylocom: Software for the Analysis of Phylogenetic Community Structure and Trait Evolution , 2022 .

[30]  G. I. Murphy Pattern in Life History and the Environment , 1968, The American Naturalist.

[31]  J. Silvertown,et al.  Plant life histories: ecological correlates and phylogenetic constraints - Preface , 1996 .

[32]  S. Tuljapurkar,et al.  Delayed reproduction and fitness in variable environments. , 1990, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  S. Foster,et al.  An overview of life-history variation in female threespine stickleback , 2008 .

[34]  D. Pyke,et al.  THE EFFECT OF STOCHASTIC TECHNIQUE ON ESTIMATES OF POPULATION VIABILITY FROM TRANSITION MATRIX MODELS , 2003 .

[35]  J. Silvertown,et al.  A COMPARATIVE DEMOGRAPHY OF PLANTS BASED UPON ELASTICITIES OF VITAL RATES , 2004 .

[36]  Miguel Franco,et al.  comparative plant demography - relative importance of life-cycle components to the finite rate of increase in woody and herbaceous perennials , 1993 .

[37]  W. Schaffer Optimal Reproductive Effort in Fluctuating Environments , 1974, The American Naturalist.

[38]  Mark W. Chase,et al.  Evolution of the angiosperms: calibrating the family tree , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[39]  C Jessica E Metcalf,et al.  Why evolutionary biologists should be demographers. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[40]  D. Roff Life History, Evolution of , 2001 .

[41]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Shift in cytotype frequency and niche space in the invasive plant Centaurea maculosa. , 2009, Ecology.

[42]  Yvonne M. Buckley,et al.  General guidelines for invasive plant management based on comparative demography of invasive and native plant populations , 2008 .

[43]  Shripad Tuljapurkar,et al.  Population Dynamics in Variable Environments. VII. The Demography and Evolution of Iteroparity , 1989, The American Naturalist.

[44]  S. Tuljapurkar,et al.  Evolution of Delayed Reproduction in Uncertain Environments: A Life‐History Perspective , 2008, The American Naturalist.

[45]  L. C. Cole The Population Consequences of Life History Phenomena , 1954, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[46]  D. Doak,et al.  Buffering of Life Histories against Environmental Stochasticity: Accounting for a Spurious Correlation between the Variabilities of Vital Rates and Their Contributions to Fitness , 2004, The American Naturalist.

[47]  S. Townley,et al.  Boom or bust? A comparative analysis of transient population dynamics in plants , 2010 .

[48]  Mark Rees,et al.  Evolutionary demography of monocarpic perennials. , 2003 .

[49]  David C. Tank,et al.  From annuals to perennials: phylogeny of subtribe Castillejinae (Orobanchaceae). , 2008, American journal of botany.

[50]  Campbell O. Webb,et al.  Phylomatic: tree assembly for applied phylogenetics , 2005 .

[51]  H. Caswell Matrix population models : construction, analysis, and interpretation , 2001 .

[52]  J. Silvertown,et al.  Life history variation in plants: an exploration of the fast-slow continuum hypothesis , 1996 .

[53]  Mark Rees,et al.  Seed Dormancy and Delayed Flowering in Monocarpic Plants: Selective Interactions in a Stochastic Environment , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[54]  A. Watkinson,et al.  Population responses of Ulex shrubs to fire in a lowland heath community , 2004 .

[55]  J. Silvertown,et al.  Comparing plant life histories using elasticity analysis: the importance of life span and the number of life-cycle stages , 1995, Oecologia.

[56]  Michael Fenner,et al.  Reproductive Allocation in Plants , 2012 .

[57]  Hal Caswell,et al.  Elasticity: The Relative Contribution of Demographic Parameters to Population Growth Rate , 1986 .

[58]  J. Diniz‐Filho,et al.  ADAPTIVE CONSTRAINTS AND THE PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE METHOD: A COMPUTER SIMULATION TEST , 2002, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[59]  T. Young,et al.  A demographic model explains life‐history variation in Arabis fecunda , 2005 .

[60]  D. Reznick Costs of reproduction: an evaluation of the empirical evidence , 1985 .

[61]  Joel s. Brown,et al.  Evolutionary Ecology of Seed-Bank Annuals in Temporally Varying Environments , 1986, The American Naturalist.

[62]  P. Datson,et al.  Climate and the evolution of annual/perennial life-histories in Nemesia (Scrophulariaceae) , 2007, Plant Systematics and Evolution.

[63]  J. Silvertown Are sub-alpine firs evolving towards semelparity? , 2005, Evolutionary Ecology.

[64]  H. de Kroon,et al.  Region versus site variation in the population dynamics of three short‐lived perennials , 2010 .

[65]  M. Rees,et al.  Evolution of flowering decisions in a stochastic, density-dependent environment , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[66]  David Reznick,et al.  THE IMPACT OF PREDATION ON LIFE HISTORY EVOLUTION IN TRINIDADIAN GUPPIES (POECILIA RETICULATA) , 1982, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[67]  G. Bell The Costs of Reproduction and Their Consequences , 1980, The American Naturalist.