Am Nat. 2023 Nov;202(5):587-603. doi: 10.1086/726336. Epub 2023 Oct 2.
AbstractIn January 2018, Sharon Strauss, then president of the American Society of Naturalists, organized a debate on the following topic: does evolutionary history inform the current functioning of ecological communities? The debaters-Ives, Lau, Mayfield, and Tobias-presented pro and con arguments, caricatured in standard debating format. Numerous examples show that both recent microevolutionary and longer-term macroevolutionary history are important to the ecological functioning of communities. On the other hand, many other examples illustrate that the evolutionary history of communities or community members does not influence ecological function, or at least not very much. This article aims to provide a provocative discussion of the consistent and conflicting patterns that emerge in the study of contemporary and historical evolutionary influences on community function, as well as to identify questions for further study. It is intended as a thought-provoking exercise to explore this complex field, specifically addressing (1) key assumptions and how they can lead us astray and (2) issues that need additional study. The debaters all agree that evolutionary history can inform us about at least some aspects of community function. The underlying question at the root of the debate, however, is how the fields of ecology and evolution can most profitably collaborate to provide a deeper and broader understanding of ecological communities.
摘要 2018 年 1 月，美国自然主义者协会（American Society of Naturalists）前主席莎伦·施特劳斯（Sharon Strauss）组织了一场辩论，主题是：进化历史是否能为当前生态群落的功能提供信息？辩论者——艾夫斯（Ives）、刘（Lau）、梅菲尔德（Mayfield）和托拜厄斯（Tobias）——以标准的辩论形式提出了正反双方的论点。许多例子表明，近期的微观进化和更长期的宏观进化历史对群落的生态功能都很重要。另一方面，许多其他例子表明，群落或群落成员的进化历史并不影响生态功能，或者至少影响不大。本文旨在对研究当代和历史进化对群落功能的影响所呈现出的一致和冲突模式进行探讨，并确定进一步研究的问题。它旨在作为一个发人深省的练习，探索这个复杂的领域，具体涉及（1）关键假设以及它们如何误导我们，（2）需要进一步研究的问题。辩论者都同意，进化历史可以为我们提供关于群落功能的至少某些方面的信息。然而，辩论背后的根本问题是，生态学和进化学领域如何能够最有效地合作，以提供对生态群落的更深入和更广泛的理解。
