Individual-based modeling of eco-evolutionary dynamics: state of the art and future directions
A challenge for eco-evolutionary research is to better understand the effect of climate and landscape changes on species and their distribution. Populations of species can respond to changes in their environment through local genetic adaptation or plasticity, dispersal, or local extinction. The individual-based modeling (IBM) approach has been repeatedly applied to assess organismic responses to environmental changes. IBMs simulate emerging adaptive behaviors from the basic entities upon which both ecological and evolutionary mechanisms act. The objective of this review is to summarize the state of the art of eco-evolutionary IBMs and to explore to what degree they already address the key responses of organisms to environmental change. In this, we identify promising approaches and potential knowledge gaps in the implementation of eco-evolutionary mechanisms to motivate future research. Using mainly the ISI Web of Science, we reveal that most of the progress in eco-evolutionary IBMs in the last decades was achieved for genetic adaptation to novel local environmental conditions. There is, however, not a single eco-evolutionary IBM addressing the three potential adaptive responses simultaneously. Additionally, IBMs implementing adaptive phenotypic plasticity are rare. Most commonly, plasticity was implemented as random noise or reaction norms. Our review further identifies a current lack of models where plasticity is an evolving trait. Future eco-evolutionary models should consider dispersal and plasticity as evolving traits with their associated costs and benefits. Such an integrated approach could help to identify conditions promoting population persistence depending on the life history strategy of organisms and the environment they experience.
KeywordsModeling Individual-based models Ecology Evolution Eco-evolutionary dynamics
We thank the research group of Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation of the University of Potsdam for their valuable comments on the manuscript.
This work was funded by the University of Potsdam.
- Barfield M, Holt RD (2016) Evolutionary rescue in novel environments: towards improving predictability. Evol Ecol Res 17:771–786Google Scholar
- Crone EE, Ellis MM, Morris WF, Stanley A, Bell T, Bierzychudek P, Ehrlén J, Kaye TN, Knight TM, Lesica P, Oostermeijer G, Quintana-Ascencio PF, Ticktin T, Valverde T, Williams JL, Doak DF, Ganesan R, Mceachern K, Thorpe AS, Menges ES (2013) Ability of matrix models to explain the past and predict the future of plant populations. Conserv Biol 27:968–978. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12049 Google Scholar
- DeAngelis DL, Mooij WM (2005) Individual-based modeling of ecological and evolutionary processes. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:147–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.102003.152644 Google Scholar
- Elith J, Leathwick JR (2009) Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:677–697. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159 Google Scholar
- Fleeming J (1867) (Review of) “The origin of species”. North Br Rev 46:277–318Google Scholar
- Hill WG, Kirkpatrick M (2010) What animal breeding has taught us about evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144728 Google Scholar
- Kearney M, Porter WP, Williams C, Ritchie S, Hoffmann AA (2009) Integrating biophysical models and evolutionary theory to predict climatic impacts on species’ ranges: the dengue mosquito Aedes aegypti in Australia. Funct Ecol 23:528–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2008.01538.x Google Scholar
- Laland KN, Uller T, Feldman MW, Sterelny K, Müller GB, Moczek A, Jablonka E, Odling-Smee J (2015) The extended evolutionary synthesis: its structure, assumptions and predictions. Proc R Soc B 282:20151019. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1019
- Litchman E, Klausmeier CA (2008) Trait-based community ecology of phytoplankton. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:615–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173549 Google Scholar
- Lynch M, Walsh B (1998) Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
- Mokany K, Ferrier S, Connolly SR, Dunstan PK, Fulton EA, Harfoot MB, Harwood TD, Richardson AJ, Roxburgh SH, Scharlemann JP, Tittensor DP, Westcott DA, Wintle BA (2015) Integrating modelling of biodiversity composition and ecosystem function. Oikos 125:10–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.02792 Google Scholar
- Moya-Laraño J, Verdeny-Vilalta O, Rowntree J, Melguizo-Ruiz N, Montserrat M, Laiolo P (2012) Chapter 1 - Climate change and eco-evolutionary dynamics in food webs. Adv Ecol Res 47:1–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-398315-2.00001-6
- Travis JMJ, Mustin K, Bartoń KA, Benton TG, Clobert J, Delgado MM, Dytham C, Hovestadt T, Palmer SCF, Van Dyck H, Bonte D (2012) Modelling dispersal: an eco-evolutionary framework incorporating emigration, movement, settlement behaviour and the multiple costs involved. Methods Ecol Evol 3:628–641. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00193.x Google Scholar
- West-Eberhard MJ (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Zheng C, Ovaskainen O, Hanski I (2009) Modelling single nucleotide effects in phosphoglucose isomerase on dispersal in the Glanville fritillary butterfly: coupling of ecological and evolutionary dynamics. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 364:1519–1532. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0005 Google Scholar