Community genetics,
evolutionary metacommunities, niche construction, ecosystem engineering, ecological
stoichiometry, genes to ecosystems, evolutionary ecology, ecological genetics, evolutionary
quantitative genetics, ecological speciation, life history theory, evolutionary
rescue, community phylogenetics, coevolutionary theory …
All of these research “fields” with their wonderfully jargony
titles involve the study of interactions between ecology and evolution. Surely
they can all be united into a single framework under a unified conceptual model
of eco-evolutionary dynamics: the “Kumbaya Model” if you will. Adopting a motivating
degree of naiveté, the working group meeting from which I just returned had set
the Kumbaya Model as one of its key goals.
The previous two meetings of this working group, both funded
by the Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Science, had taken place at the Gault
Nature Reserve, McGill’s field station/mountain near Montreal. The working
group then splintered (or adaptively diversified) into three subgroups: one
considering evolutionary rescue, one considering rates and patterns of trait
evolution, and one working on the Kumbaya Model. An original driving force
behind the overall umbrella working group was Eric Palkovacs, previously at Duke
University. In the last year, Eric moved to UC Santa Cruz and so when a meeting
location for the third subgroup was debated, California was a promising
candidate. Tipping the balance, my family has a vineyard and winery in Napa (http://www.hendrywines.com/) that could
host us for free.
The Chardonnay and Pinot Noir harvest was in full swing. |
Last Friday, ten eco-evo types (yes, Jonathan Davies, you too
now fall under this appellation) descended on the Hendry Vineyard in Napa – and
particularly on the house of my brother Mike, his long-to-be-suffering wife
Molly, and their enthusiastic dog Jake. For three days, we held hands, sang
Kumbaya, and asked of the eco-evolutionary fields “why can’t we all just get
along”? When inspiration flagged, we sought more of it through walks, tours of
the vineyard and winery, a lot of very fine wine, and a barbeque banquet to end
all banquets (Mike and Molly crafted a feast for us that included Mike-caught
coho salmon from our cabin in BC and Molly-grown Asian pears from the garden
below their house.)
Jonathan used locally available fossils to time-calibrate a large fish phylogeny. |
On one of the walks, we were privileged to witness and
thereby recognize and appreciate the Jake Reset Effect. At this time of year, reservoirs
on the vineyard have very little water in them and are just a few feet deep.
With thoughts of maybe initiating some eco-evolutionary research in these
reservoirs, we had walked over to have a look – and Jake had come along as a
guide. As soon as we arrived, Jake followed his muse and waded into the water
and around the reservoir. In doing so, he stirred up mud from the bottom in big
plumes. David Post had been standing beside the reservoir and waxing poetic on
the power of Daphnia as a model system for studying eco-evolutionary dynamics
when he noticed Jake wading through the sediments. “Noooooo …” he wailed “Jake
you are stirring up the Daphnia egg bank and destroying decades of adaptive evolution.”
Although he was being a bit histrionic, his assertion could literally be true:
small and rare disturbances, such as a dog walking through a reservoir, could reset
or at least remix the past evolutionary history of Daphnia and shuffle its genetic
variation across the decades of evolution buried in the sediments. So, in one
fell swoop, it was too late and so much for Daphnia research in the Hendry
Vineyard Reservoir. At least the reservoir still has stickleback and I doubt
Jake can so easily reset their evolution.
"... and another cool thing about Daphnia is ..." |
Although walking and drinking wine might seem like frivolous
distractions, we actually did make great progress on the Kumbaya Model. I don’t
want to spill the beans here, because you will soon (or late) be able to read
it in Science or, failing that, the Proceedings of the Southwest Santa Cruz
Natural History Society. We, and Eric in particular (see his previous blog entry),
have railed about the fact that eco-evo review papers are more common than eco-evo
studies that actually present real data, and so we promise that this new Kumbaya
Model paper will be the review to end all reviews – the one review to rule them
all. In the meantime, we will seek new and clever ways to invade the vineyard again
and perhaps collect some real data as a part of Fanie Pelletier’s Global
Eco-Evolutionary Research Consortium.
A nexus of the consortium? (Photo by Mike Hendry.) |
So what could we do? An excellent way to study the role of
evolution in ecological dynamics is to have two replicate populations (such as
Daphnia in two ponds) where one population is allowed to evolve adaptively while
the other is not. And one of the best ways to prevent directional adaptive
evolution is to increase mixing between gene pools that have been selected in
different environments, such as populations from different places or that exist
at different times – think Daphnia eggs from different depths in the sediment
(and therefore different years). As there are two reservoirs on the vineyard, I
am thinking we can just have Jake regularly wade through one (adaptation interrupted)
but not the other (adaptation perfected). I can see the paper title now: “Experimental
Manipulation of the Jake Reset Effect Validates the Kumbaya Model of
Eco-Evolutionary Dynamics.” The only question is where Jake should be in the author
list.
Jake: for hire as a reset effect technician. |
Workshop participants who can all just get along: Andrew
Jones, Chris Dalton, Nash Turley, Dan Hasselman, Alison Derry, Fanie Pelletier,
David Post, Eric Palkovacs, Andrew Hendry, and Jonathan Davies.
Honorary participants: Mike Hendry, Molly Hendry, and
especially Jake.
Photo by Mike Hendry. |
No comments:
Post a Comment