On the determination of evolutionary outcomes directly from the population dynamics of the resident

In order to determine the possible evolutionary behaviour of an ecological system using adaptive dynamics, it is necessary in an ab initio calculation to find the fitness and its derivatives at a singular point. It has been suggested that the possible evolutionary behaviour can be predicted directly from the resident population dynamics, without the need for calculation, by applying three criteria—one based on the form of the density dependent rates and two on the role played by the evolving parameters. The existing arguments for these criteria are rather limited: they apply to systems in which individuals enter an initial class and can then move through any number of other population classes sequentially. (Extensions are included but only apply for systems of two and three classes.) Additionally, many of the arguments depend on the use of a phenomenologically motivated fitness (shown equivalent to the standard form but in a rather long and indirect manner). The present paper removes all these flaws—the criteria are established directly from the standard definition of fitness and individuals can enter any class and move through the classes non-sequentially without restriction on their number. The criteria thus established underlie a geometric description of the singular behaviour in adaptive dynamics which allows direct inferences to be made from population dynamics to the possible singular behaviour depending on which of the criteria apply and on the nature of the trade-off between evolving parameters. The method has the great advantage of leaving the trade-off explicit but unspecified.

[1]  R. Bowers,et al.  Can possible evolutionary outcomes be determined directly from the population dynamics? , 2008, Theoretical population biology.

[2]  R. Nisbet,et al.  How should we define 'fitness' for general ecological scenarios? , 1992, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[3]  É. Kisdi,et al.  Evolution of handling time can destroy the coexistence of cycling predators , 2006, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[4]  T. V. Van Dooren,et al.  Adaptive walks on changing landscapes: Levins' approach extended. , 2004, Theoretical population biology.

[5]  Community dynamics, trade-offs, invasion criteria and the evolution of host resistance to microparasites. , 2001, Journal of theoretical biology.

[6]  I. Eshel Evolutionary and continuous stability , 1983 .

[7]  A. White,et al.  The influence of trade-off shape on evolutionary behaviour in classical ecological scenarios. , 2008, Journal of theoretical biology.

[8]  Stefan A H Geritz,et al.  Evolutionary branching and long-term coexistence of cycling predators: critical function analysis. , 2007, Theoretical Population Biology.

[9]  É. Kisdi,et al.  Evolutionarily singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree , 2004, Evolutionary Ecology.

[10]  Odo Diekmann,et al.  When does evolution optimize , 2008 .

[11]  M. Boots,et al.  The Evolution of Costly Resistance in Host‐Parasite Systems , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[12]  R. Bowers,et al.  When is evolutionary branching in predator-prey systems possible with an explicit carrying capacity? , 2007, Mathematical biosciences.

[13]  Ulf Dieckmann,et al.  Trade‐Off Geometries and Frequency‐Dependent Selection , 2004, The American Naturalist.

[14]  R. Levins Theory of Fitness in a Heterogeneous Environment. I. The Fitness Set and Adaptive Function , 1962, The American Naturalist.

[15]  Ulf Dieckmann,et al.  Evolutionary Branching and Sympatric Speciation Caused by Different Types of Ecological Interactions , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[16]  R. Levins THEORY OF FITNESS IN A HETEROGENEOUS ENVIRONMENT. 3. THE RESPONSE TO SELECTION. , 1964, Journal of theoretical biology.

[17]  C. S. Holling The components of prédation as revealed by a study of small-mammal prédation of the European pine sawfly. , 1959 .

[18]  Andrew White,et al.  The geometric theory of adaptive evolution: trade-off and invasion plots. , 2005, Journal of theoretical biology.

[19]  Mats Gyllenberg,et al.  Necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of an optimisation principle in evolution , 2011, Journal of mathematical biology.

[20]  J. M. Smith,et al.  The Logic of Animal Conflict , 1973, Nature.

[21]  S. M. Verduyn Lunel,et al.  Stochastic and spatial structures of dynamical systems , 1996 .

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

[23]  S. Stearns,et al.  The Evolution of Life Histories , 1992 .

[24]  É. Kisdi,et al.  Evolutionary branching/speciation: contrasting results from systems with explicit or emergent carrying capacities , 2003 .