Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, 111 Research Drive, Bethlehem, PA 18015, USA.
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-4501, USA.
Integr Comp Biol. 2017 Dec 1;57(6):1151-1160. doi: 10.1093/icb/icx113.
Life history strategies are composed of multiple fitness components, each of which incurs costs and benefits. Consequently, organisms cannot maximize all fitness components simultaneously. This situation results in a dynamic array of trade-offs in which some fitness traits prevail at the expense of others, often depending on context. The identification of specific constraints and trade-offs has helped elucidate physiological mechanisms that underlie variation in behavioral and physiological life history strategies. There is general recognition that trade-offs are made at the individual and population level, but much remains to be learned concerning the molecular neuroendocrine mechanisms that underlie trade-offs. For example, we still do not know whether the mechanisms that underlie trade-offs at the individual level relate to trade-offs at the population level. To advance our understanding of trade-offs, we organized a group of speakers who study neuroendocrine mechanisms at the interface of traits that are not maximized simultaneously. Speakers were invited to represent research from a wide range of taxa including invertebrates (e.g., worms and insects), fish, nonavian reptiles, birds, and mammals. Three general themes emerged. First, the study of trade-offs requires that we investigate traditional endocrine mechanisms that include hormones, neuropeptides, and their receptors, and in addition, other chemical messengers not traditionally included in endocrinology. The latter group includes growth factors, metabolic intermediates, and molecules of the immune system. Second, the nomenclature and theory of neuroscience that has dominated the study of behavior is being re-evaluated in the face of evidence for the peripheral actions of so-called neuropeptides and neurotransmitters and the behavioral repercussions of these actions. Finally, environmental and ecological contexts continue to be critical in unmasking molecular mechanisms that are hidden when study animals are housed in enclosed spaces, with unlimited food, without competitors or conspecifics, and in constant ambient conditions.
生活史策略由多个适应度组成部分组成,每个组成部分都有成本和收益。因此,生物体不能同时最大化所有适应度组成部分。这种情况导致了一系列动态的权衡取舍,其中一些适应度特征优先于其他特征,这通常取决于环境。确定特定的限制和权衡取舍有助于阐明生理机制,这些机制是行为和生理生活史策略变化的基础。人们普遍认识到,权衡取舍是在个体和群体层面上做出的,但对于作为权衡取舍基础的分子神经内分泌机制,仍有许多需要了解。例如,我们仍然不知道作为个体层面权衡取舍基础的机制是否与群体层面的权衡取舍有关。为了深入了解权衡取舍,我们组织了一组研究同时不能最大化的特征之间的神经内分泌机制的演讲者。邀请演讲者代表来自广泛分类群的研究,包括无脊椎动物(例如,蠕虫和昆虫)、鱼类、非鸟类爬行动物、鸟类和哺乳动物。出现了三个主题。首先,权衡取舍的研究需要我们调查传统的内分泌机制,包括激素、神经肽及其受体,此外,还包括传统内分泌学不包括的其他化学信使。后一组包括生长因子、代谢中间产物和免疫系统分子。其次,在有证据表明所谓的神经肽和神经递质具有外周作用以及这些作用对行为的影响的情况下,神经科学的命名法和理论正在重新评估。最后,环境和生态背景在揭示当研究动物被关在封闭空间中、有无限制的食物、没有竞争者或同种动物,以及在恒定的环境条件下隐藏的分子机制时,仍然是至关重要的。