The use of fluctuating asymmetry as a measure of environmentally induced developmental instability: A meta-analysis
The use of fluctuating asymmetry as a measure of environmentally induced developmental instability: A meta-analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.02.024
复制
发表时间：
2013-07-01
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Mousseau, Timothy A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Beasley, De Anna E.;Bonisoli-Alquati, Andrea;Mousseau, Timothy A.
长期以来，希望研究生物体对环境质量变化的敏感性的生物学家对双边对称性的随机和细微偏离(波动不对称)一直很感兴趣。然而，由于文献中不一致的结果，FA作为生物标记物的可靠性受到了质疑。我们对已发表的文献进行了荟萃分析，以检验FA是昆虫环境压力的可靠生物标记物的假设，并在研究中确定可能的变异来源。与野生种群相比，由于缺乏来自其他环境因素的混杂影响，我们希望研究能在实验室种群中检测到对FA的更大、更积极的影响。此外，我们预测，使用几何形态计量学方法对FA的形状和大小进行研究的研究将比线性和合并测量方法对环境质量的变化更敏感，从而显示出对FA的更大影响。我们还预计，与自然发生的应激源相比，人为应激源对FA产生的影响要大得多，因为有机体无法缓冲针对新应激源的发育途径。最后，我们预测，在通过检测对健康相关特征的负面影响来验证作用于有机体的环境因素是应激源的研究中，影响的程度相对更大。总体而言，我们发现FA是环境胁迫的敏感生物标志物。在不同研究中，环境应激源解释了影响FA的变化的36%。与没有检测到环境应激源影响的研究相比，显示压力对健康相关特征的负面影响的研究显示，对FA的正面影响要大得多。此外，在实验室条件下进行的研究发现，与实地研究相比，对FA的影响要大得多。测量的特质的种类和应激源的新颖性并不能显著解释不同研究之间的差异。因此，使用FA作为环境压力的生物标记物是一个合法的工具，特别是当研究证实应激源与研究有机体的生物相关性时。(C)2013爱思唯尔有限公司。保留所有权利。
Random and subtle deviations from bilateral symmetry (fluctuating asymmetry) have long been of interest to biologists who wish to study the susceptibility of organisms to changes in environmental quality. However, the reliability of FA as a biomarker has come under question due to inconsistent results in the literature. We conducted a meta-analysis of published literature to test the hypothesis that FA is a reliable biomarker of environmental stress in insects and identify possible sources of variation amongst studies. We expected studies to detect larger, positive magnitudes of effect on FA in lab populations due to the lack of confounding effects from other environmental factors compared to wild populations. Additionally, we predicted that studies that used geometric morphometric approaches to FA in shape and size would be more sensitive to changes in environmental quality compared to linear and meristic measures and thus show larger effects on FA. We also expected anthropogenic stressors to generate significantly larger effects on FA compared to naturally occurring stressors due to the organisms' inability to buffer developmental pathways against a novel stressor. Finally, we predicted comparatively larger magnitudes of effect in studies that verified the environmental factor acting on the organism was a stressor by detecting negative effects on fitness-related traits. Overall, we found that FA is a sensitive biomarker of environmental stress. Environmental stressors explained 36% of the variation of effect on FA across studies. Studies that demonstrated a negative effect of the stressor on fitness-related traits showed significantly larger, positive magnitudes of effect on FA compared to studies that did not detect an effect from the environmental stressor. Additionally, studies conducted under laboratory conditions detected significantly larger, effects on FA compared to field-based studies. The kind of trait measured and the novelty of the stressor did not significantly account for differences amongst studies. Thus, the use of FA as a biomarker of environmental stress is a legitimate tool particularly when studies verify the biological relevance of stressors for the study organism. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.