Velotta Jonathan P, Cheviron Zachary A
Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA.
Integr Comp Biol. 2018 Dec 1;58(6):1098-1110. doi: 10.1093/icb/icy117.
Phenotypic plasticity is not universally adaptive. In certain cases, plasticity can result in phenotypic shifts that reduce fitness relative to the un-induced state. A common cause of such maladaptive plasticity is the co-option of ancestral developmental and physiological response systems to meet novel challenges. Because these systems evolved to meet specific challenges in an ancestral environment (e.g., localized and transient hypoxia), their co-option to meet a similar, but novel, stressor (e.g., reductions in ambient pO2 at high elevation) can lead to misdirected responses that reduce fitness. In such cases, natural selection should act to remodel phenotypic plasticity to suppress the expression of these maladaptive responses. Because these maladaptive responses reduce the fitness of colonizers in new environments, this remodeling of ancestral plasticity may be among the earliest steps in adaptive walks toward new local optima. Genetic compensation has been proposed as a general form of adaptive evolution that leads to the suppression of maladaptive plasticity to restore the ancestral trait value in the face of novel stimuli. Given their central role in the regulation of basic physiological functions, we argue that genetic compensation may often be achieved by modifications of homeostatic regulatory systems. We further suggest that genetic compensation to modify homeostatic systems can be achieved by two alternative strategies that differ in their mechanistic underpinnings; to our knowledge, these strategies have not been formally recognized by previous workers. We then consider how the mechanistic details of these alternative strategies may constrain their evolution. These considerations lead us to argue that genetic compensation is most likely to evolve by compensatory physiological changes that safeguard internal homeostatic conditions to prevent the expression of maladaptive portions of conserved reaction norms, rather than direct evolution of plasticity itself. Finally, we outline a simple experimental framework to test this hypothesis. Our goal is to stimulate research aimed at providing a deeper mechanistic understanding of whether and how phenotypic plasticity can be remodeled following environmental shifts that render ancestral responses maladaptive, an issue with increasing importance in our current era of rapid environmental change.
表型可塑性并非普遍具有适应性。在某些情况下,可塑性会导致表型发生变化,相对于未诱导状态而言,这种变化会降低适应性。这种适应不良的可塑性的一个常见原因是,为应对新挑战而采用了祖先的发育和生理反应系统。由于这些系统是为应对祖先环境中的特定挑战(例如局部和短暂的缺氧)而进化的,因此将它们用于应对类似但新颖的应激源(例如高海拔地区环境中氧气分压的降低)可能会导致反应方向错误,从而降低适应性。在这种情况下,自然选择应采取行动重塑表型可塑性,以抑制这些适应不良反应的表达。由于这些适应不良的反应会降低殖民者在新环境中的适应性,因此对祖先可塑性的这种重塑可能是朝着新的局部最优状态进行适应性进化的最早步骤之一。遗传补偿已被提出是适应性进化的一种普遍形式,它会导致抑制适应不良的可塑性,从而在面对新刺激时恢复祖先的性状值。鉴于它们在基本生理功能调节中的核心作用,我们认为遗传补偿通常可以通过对稳态调节系统的修饰来实现。我们进一步表明,通过改变稳态系统来实现遗传补偿可以通过两种机制基础不同的替代策略来实现;据我们所知,这些策略尚未得到前人的正式认可。然后,我们考虑这些替代策略的机制细节如何可能限制它们的进化。这些考虑使我们认为,遗传补偿最有可能通过补偿性生理变化来进化,这些变化可维护内部稳态条件,以防止保守反应规范中适应不良部分的表达,而不是可塑性本身的直接进化。最后,我们概述了一个简单的实验框架来检验这一假设。我们的目标是激发相关研究,旨在更深入地从机制上理解在环境变化使祖先反应变得适应不良后,表型可塑性是否以及如何能够被重塑,这一问题在我们当前快速环境变化的时代变得越来越重要。