If everything is special, is anything special? A response to comments on Bailey et al.
If everything is special, is anything special? A response to comments on Bailey et al.
复制标题
如果一切都很特别，那还有什么特别的吗？
DOI：
10.1093/beheco/arx191
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Bailey N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bailey N
有发展的潜力（Chenoweth et al. 2010）。因此，理解IGE对表型进化的重要性的一个关键问题是确定给定的社会环境将保持稳定多久，以及它如何与表型上的DGE相互作用。我们认为，长期的选择实验可能对这种测试有用。然而，可能正是那些确保行为受到政府间专家组影响的特征，也有可能减少政府间专家组的长期影响。因此，政府间专家小组对短期发展可能更为重要。IGE可以改变表型进化的方向和速度（Wolf等人，1998年）。在过去的10年里，进化遗传学家已经越来越意识到多变量遗传约束的出现，因为选择的目标是多个遗传相关的性状，这意味着在某些方向上比其他方向有更多的遗传变异可供选择（Blows和沃尔什2009）。这不仅减慢了表型进化的速度，而且严重地使其方向发生偏差（Schluter 1996）。IGE是否存在类似的多元遗传约束，或者IGE是否在表型空间的新区域中产生遗传（共）变异？如果IGE促进了行为的进化，我们期待后者。一个潜在的有用的方法来测试IGE和行为进化之间的联系是估计多性状的分歧人群之间的向量，并评估其方向与直接和间接的遗传方差-协方差矩阵（GDirect和GIndirect）的结构。如果IGE重塑进化轨迹，我们应该能够通过扩展这些现有的多元方法来检测到这一点。最后，我们分享贝利等人的观点。s（2017）认为，更深入地理解行为在表型进化中的地位需要更多地考虑IGE。值得注意的是，即使是研究DGE的行为也需要大样本量和相当大的努力，当包括IGE时，这些要求甚至更高。因此，实验室系统可能会为行为生态学和IGE理论之间的更大综合铺平道路。
have the potential to evolve (Chenoweth et al. 2010). Consequently, a key issue in understanding the importance of IGEs to phenotypic evolution is determining how long a given social environment will remain stable and how this interacts with DGEs on the phenotype. We think that long-term selection experiments could be useful for such tests. It may be, however, that the very features that ensure behavior is influenced by IGEs are also likely to reduce the long-term impact of IGEs. IGEs may therefore be far more important for short-term evolution. IGEs can alter both the direction and rate of phenotypic evolution (Wolf et al. 1998). Over the last 10 years, evolutionary geneticists have become increasingly aware of multivariate genetic constraints that arise because selection targets multiple traits that are genetically correlated, meaning there is more genetic variance available for selection in some directions than in others (Blows and Walsh 2009). This not only slows the rate of phenotypic evolution but also critically, biases its direction (Schluter 1996). Do similar multivariate genetic constraints exist for IGEs or do IGEs generate genetic (co) variation in new regions of phenotypic space? If IGEs enhance the evolution of behavior, we expect the latter. One potentially useful way to test for a link between IGEs and behavioral evolution is to estimate vectors of multitrait divergence between populations and assess their orientation with the structure of both the direct and indirect genetic variance-covariance matrix (GDirect and GIndirect). If IGEs reshape evolutionary trajectories, we should be able to detect this by extending these existing multivariate approaches. In conclusion, we share Bailey et al.’s (2017) view that a deeper understanding of behavior’s place in phenotypic evolution requires greater consideration of IGEs. It is worth noting, that studying even DGEs for behavior requires large sample sizes and considerable effort and these requirements are even greater when including IGEs. It is therefore likely that experimental laboratory systems will pave the way for greater synthesis between behavioral ecology and IGE theory.