4.5 Article

Rapid evolution of diet choice in an introduced population of Trinidadian guppies

期刊

BIOLOGY LETTERS
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2022.0443

关键词

ecosystem function; diet preference; rapid evolution; resource competition; trophic ecology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Eco-evolutionary theory has sparked interest in the rapid evolution of functional traits, including diet. This study investigates the hereditary basis and rapid evolution of diet preference in Trinidadian guppies. F2 common garden descendants from high-predation and low-predation environments showed that diet preference rapidly evolved in the introduced population within 12 years.
Eco-evolutionary theory has brought an interest in the rapid evolution of functional traits. Among them, diet is an important determinant of ecosystem structure, affecting food web dynamics and nutrient cycling. However, it is largely unknown whether diet, or diet preference, has a hereditary basis and can evolve on contemporary timescales. Here, we study the diet preferences of Trinidadian guppies Poecilia reticulata collected from directly below an introduction site of fish transplanted from a high-predation environment into a low predation site where their densities and competition increased. Behavioural assays on F2 common garden descendants of the ancestral and derived populations showed that diet preference has rapidly evolved in the introduced population in only 12 years (approx. 36 generations). Specifically, we show that the preference for high-quality food generally found in high-predation guppies is lost in the newly derived low-predation population, who show an inertia toward the first encountered food. This result is predicted by theory stating that organisms should evolve less selective diets under higher competition. Demonstrating that diet preference can show rapid and adaptive evolution is important to our understanding of eco-evolutionary feedbacks and the role of evolution in ecosystem dynamics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据