On the importance of time scales when studying adaptive evolution

Long‐term field studies coupled with quantitative genomics offer a powerful means to understand the genetic bases underlying quantitative traits and their evolutionary changes. However, analyzing and interpreting the time scales at which adaptive evolution occurs is challenging. First, while evolution is predictable in the short term, with strikingly rapid phenotypic changes in data series, it remains unpredictable in the long term. Second, while the temporal dynamics of some loci with large effects on phenotypic variation and fitness have been characterized, this task can be complicated in cases of highly polygenic trait architecture implicating numerous small effect size loci, or when statistical tests are sensitive to the heterogeneity of some key characteristics of the genome, like variation in recombination rate along the chromosomes. After introducing these aforementioned challenges, we discuss a recent investigation of the genomic architecture and spatio‐temporal variation in great tit bill length, which was related to the recent use of bird feeders. We discuss how this case study illustrates the importance of considering different temporal scales and evolutionary mechanisms both while analyzing trait temporal trends and when searching for and interpreting the signals of putative genomic footprints of selection. More generally this commentary discusses interesting challenges for unraveling the time scale at which adaptive traits evolve and their genomic bases.

[1]  E. Danchin,et al.  The Missing Response to Selection in the Wild , 2018, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[2]  Víctor Soria-Carrasco,et al.  Natural selection and the predictability of evolution in Timema stick insects , 2018, Science.

[3]  K. Csilléry,et al.  Genomic Quantitative Genetics to Study Evolution in the Wild. , 2017, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[4]  J. M. Comeron,et al.  Background selection as null hypothesis in population genomics: insights and challenges from Drosophila studies , 2017, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[5]  Kees van Oers,et al.  Recent natural selection causes adaptive evolution of an avian polygenic trait , 2017, Science.

[6]  S. Bensch,et al.  Comparative analysis examining patterns of genomic differentiation across multiple episodes of population divergence in birds , 2017, bioRxiv.

[7]  Marius Roesti,et al.  Genomics of adaptive divergence with chromosome‐scale heterogeneity in crossover rate , 2017, Molecular ecology.

[8]  A. C. Mateman,et al.  Environment-Dependent Genotype-Phenotype Associations in Avian Breeding Time , 2017, Front. Genet..

[9]  W. Cresko,et al.  Ancient genomic variation underlies repeated ecological adaptation in young stickleback populations , 2017, bioRxiv.

[10]  R. Burri Interpreting differentiation landscapes in the light of long-term linked selection , 2017, bioRxiv.

[11]  J. Poissant,et al.  Multivariate selection and intersexual genetic constraints in a wild bird population , 2016, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[12]  M. Quail,et al.  The industrial melanism mutation in British peppered moths is a transposable element , 2016, Nature.

[13]  B. Grant,et al.  A beak size locus in Darwin’s finches facilitated character displacement during a drought , 2016, Science.

[14]  M. Wellenreuther,et al.  Detecting Polygenic Evolution: Problems, Pitfalls, and Promises. , 2016, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[15]  Kai Zeng,et al.  Evolutionary signals of selection on cognition from the great tit genome and methylome , 2016, Nature Communications.

[16]  Pall I. Olason,et al.  Linked selection and recombination rate variation drive the evolution of the genomic landscape of differentiation across the speciation continuum of Ficedula flycatchers , 2015, Genome research.

[17]  M. Grabherr,et al.  Evolution of Darwin’s finches and their beaks revealed by genome sequencing , 2015, Nature.

[18]  J. Haines,et al.  Carbon enters silica forming a cristobalite-type CO2–SiO2 solid solution , 2014, Nature Communications.

[19]  Bengt Hansson,et al.  Assessing Multivariate Constraints to Evolution across Ten Long-Term Avian Studies , 2014, PloS one.

[20]  Marius Roesti,et al.  Recombination in the threespine stickleback genome—patterns and consequences , 2013, Molecular ecology.

[21]  B. Charlesworth Background selection 20 years on: the Wilhelmine E. Key 2012 invitational lecture. , 2013, The Journal of heredity.

[22]  Pall I. Olason,et al.  The genomic landscape of species divergence in Ficedula flycatchers , 2012, Nature.

[23]  A. Hendry,et al.  Genome divergence during evolutionary diversification as revealed in replicate lake-stream stickleback population pairs. , 2012, Molecular ecology.

[24]  M. Rockman THE QTN PROGRAM AND THE ALLELES THAT MATTER FOR EVOLUTION: ALL THAT'S GOLD DOES NOT GLITTER , 2012, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[25]  H. Hoekstra,et al.  Molecular spandrels: tests of adaptation at the genetic level , 2011, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[26]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Individuals and populations: the role of long-term, individual-based studies of animals in ecology and evolutionary biology. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[27]  J. Pemberton Evolution of quantitative traits in the wild: mind the ecology , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[28]  David A. Leavens Darwin's finches , 2006 .

[29]  Peter R. Grant,et al.  Evolution of Character Displacement in Darwin's Finches , 2006, Science.

[30]  M. Murray,et al.  All that's gold does not glitter: effects of an increase in respiratory rate on pulmonary mechanics and CO2 kinetics in acute respiratory failure. , 2002, Critical care medicine.

[31]  B. Grant,et al.  Unpredictable Evolution in a 30-Year Study of Darwin's Finches , 2002, Science.

[32]  Charles R. Brown,et al.  Ecology and Evolution of Darwin’s Finches , 2001, Heredity.

[33]  W. Ewens Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits , 1999 .

[34]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  The effect of recombination on background selection. , 1996, Genetical research.

[35]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  The effect of deleterious mutations on neutral molecular variation. , 1993, Genetics.

[36]  B. Grant,et al.  Evolution of Darwin’s finches caused by a rare climatic event , 1993, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[37]  P. Grant,et al.  Intense Natural Selection in a Population of Darwin's Finches (Geospizinae) in the Gal�pagos , 1981, Science.

[38]  L. Kruuk,et al.  Explaining stasis: microevolutionary studies in natural populations , 2004, Genetica.