Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Cryptic evolution in a wild bird population

Nature volume 412, pages 76–79 (2001)Cite this article

Abstract

Microevolution is expected to be commonplace, yet there are few thoroughly documented cases of microevolution in wild populations1,2. In contrast, it is often observed that apparently heritable traits under strong and consistent directional selection fail to show the expected evolutionary response3,4. One explanation proposed for this paradox is that a genetic response to selection may be masked by opposing changes in the environment5,6. We used data from a 20-year study of collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis) to explore selection on, and evolution of, a heritable trait: relative body weight at fledging (‘condition’). Despite consistent positive directional selection, on both the phenotypic and the additive genetic component (breeding values, estimated from an animal model) of condition, the mean phenotypic value of this trait in the population has declined, rather than increased, over time. Here we show that, despite this decline, the mean breeding value for condition has increased over time. The mismatch between response to selection at the levels of genotype and phenotype can be explained by environmental deterioration, concealing underlying evolution. This form of cryptic evolution may be common in natural environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Patterns of natural selection on condition index of nestling collared flycatchers from 1981 to 1998.
Figure 2: Changes in condition index over time in the collared flycatcher population from 1981 to 1999.
Figure 3: Associations between key life history traits and estimated breeding values (EBVs) for condition.
Figure 4: Environmental deterioration over time.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Grant, P. R. & Grant, B. R. Predicting microevolutionary responses to directional selection on heritable variation. Evolution 49, 241–251 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Reznick, D. N., Shaw, F. H., Rodd, F. H. & Shaw, R. G. Evaluation of the rate of evolution in a natural population of guppies. Science 275, 1934–1937 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Price, T., Kirkpatrick, M. & Arnold, S. J. Directional selection and the evolution of breeding date in birds. Science 240, 798–799 (1988).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Alatalo, R. V., Gustafsson, L. & Lundberg, A. Phenotypic selection on heritable size traits: environmental variance and genetic response. Am. Nat. 135, 464–471 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cooke, F., Taylor, P. D., Frances, C. M. & Rockwell, R. F. Directional selection and clutch size in birds. Am. Nat. 136, 261–267 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Frank, S. A. & Slatkin, M. Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 7, 92–95 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lynch, M. & Walsh, B. Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits (Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Roff, D. A. Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics (Chapman & Hall, New York, 1997).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Hochachka, W. & Smith, J. N. Determinants and consequences of nestling condition in song sparrows. J. Anim. Ecol. 60, 995–1008 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lindén, M., Gustafsson, L. & Pärt, T. Selection of fledging mass in the collared flycatcher and the great tit. Ecology 73, 336–343 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Both, C., Visser, M. E. & Verboven, N. Density-dependent recruitment rates in great tits: the importance of being heavier. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266, 465–469 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sorci, G. & Clobert, J. Natural selection on hatching body size and mass in two environments in the common lizard (Lacerta vivipara). Evol. Ecol. Res. 1, 303–316 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Boltnev, A. I., York, A. E. & Antonelis, G. A. Northern fur seal young: interrelationships among birth size, growth, and survival. Can. J. Zool. 76, 843–854 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Merilä, J. Genetic variation in offspring condition—an experiment. Funct. Ecol. 10, 465–474 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Merilä, J., Kruuk, L. E. B. & Sheldon, B. C. Natural selection on the genetical component of body condition in a wild bird population. J. Evol. Biol. (submitted).

  16. Conover, D. O. & Schultz, E. T. Phenotypic similarity and the evolutionary significance of countergradient variation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10, 248–252 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Visser, M. E. & Holleman, L. J. M. Warmer springs disrupt the synchrony of oak and winter moth phenology. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 289–294 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gustafsson, L. Inter- and intraspecific competition for nest holes in a population of the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis. Ibis 130, 11–16 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Doligez, B., Danchin, E., Clobert, J. & Gustafsson, L. The use of conspecific reproductive success for breeding habitat selection in a non-colonial, hole-nesting species, the collared flycatcher. J. Anim. Ecol. 68, 1193–1206 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Alatalo, R. V. & Lundberg, A. Density-dependence in breeding success of the pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca). J. Anim. Ecol. 53, 969–978 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lewontin, R. C. Adaptation. Sci. Am. 239, 212–230 (1978).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gilchrist, A. S. & Partridge, L. A comparison of the genetic basis of wing size divergence in three parallel body size clines of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 153, 1775–1787 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Sheldon, B. C., Merilä, J., Lindgren, G. & Ellegren, H. Gender and environmental sensitivity in nestling collared flycatchers. Ecology 79, 1939–1948 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Groeneveld, E. REML VCE, a Multivariate Multi-Model Restricted Maximum Likelihood (Co)Variance Component Estimation Package, Version 3.2 User's Guide. (Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Behaviour, Federal Research Center of Agriculture (FAL), Mariensee, Germany, 1995). 〈http://www.tzv.fal.de/institut/genetik/pub/eg/vce/manual/manual.html〉

  25. Groeneveld, E., Kovac, M., Wang, T. L. & Fernando, R. L. Computing algorithms in a general purpose BLUP package for multivariate prediction and estimation. Arch. Anim. Breed. 15, 399–412 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Meyer, K. Restricted maximum-likelihood to estimate variance components for animal models with several random effects using a derivative-free algorithm. Genet. Selection Evol. 21, 317–340 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Blair, H. T. & Pollak, E. J. Estimation of genetic trend in a selected population with and without the use of a control population. J. Anim. Sci. 58, 878–886 (1984).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Southwood, O. I. & Kennedy, B. W. Genetic and environmental trends for litter size in swine. J. Anim. Sci. 69, 3177–3182 (1991).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Merilä, J., Sheldon, B. C. & Ellegren, H. Antagonistic natural selection revealed by molecular sex identification of nestling collared flycatchers. Mol. Ecol. 6, 1167–1175 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Genstat, 1998. Genstat 5, Release 4.1 (Lawes Agricultural Trust, IACR, Rothamsted, 1998).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank I. P. F. Owens, A. J. van Noordwijk, B. Walsh and D. A. Roff for comments on the manuscript, M. Visser for data on caterpillars and oaks, and the numerous people who have helped in collecting the data in the course of the study, in particular L. Gustafsson. Our research was supported by the Swedish Natural Science Research Council, the Nordic Academy for the Advanced Study (J.M.) and by Royal Society University Research Fellowships to B.C.S. and L.E.B.K.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Population Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, Norbyvägen 18d, Uppsala, SE-752 36, Sweden

    J. Merilä

  2. Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JT, UK

    L. E. B. Kruuk

  3. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK

    B. C. Sheldon

  4. Department of Animal Ecology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, Norbyvägen 18d, Uppsala, SE-752 36, Sweden

    B. C. Sheldon

Authors
  1. J. Merilä
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. E. B. Kruuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. C. Sheldon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Merilä.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Merilä, J., Kruuk, L. & Sheldon, B. Cryptic evolution in a wild bird population. Nature 412, 76–79 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/35083580

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35083580

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing