Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?

Numerous theoretical models suggest that sympatric speciation is possible when frequency-dependent interactions such as intraspecific competition drive disruptive selection on a trait that is also subject to assortative mating. Here, I review recent evidence that both conditions are met in lake popu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Daniel I. Bolnick
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2011-01-01
Series:International Journal of Ecology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/942847
id doaj-c2cc6cb5cc224bcdaec9672b1109566a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c2cc6cb5cc224bcdaec9672b1109566a2020-11-25T01:08:15ZengHindawi LimitedInternational Journal of Ecology1687-97081687-97162011-01-01201110.1155/2011/942847942847Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?Daniel I. Bolnick0Howard Hughes Medical Institute; Section of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, One University Station C0930, Austin, TX 78712, USANumerous theoretical models suggest that sympatric speciation is possible when frequency-dependent interactions such as intraspecific competition drive disruptive selection on a trait that is also subject to assortative mating. Here, I review recent evidence that both conditions are met in lake populations of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Nonetheless, sympatric speciation appears to be rare or absent in stickleback. If stickleback qualitatively fit the theoretical requirements for sympatric speciation, why do they not undergo sympatric speciation? I present simulations showing that disruptive selection and assortative mating in stickleback, though present, are too weak to drive speciation. Furthermore, I summarize empirical evidence that disruptive selection in stickleback drives other forms of evolutionary diversification (plasticity, increased trait variance, and sexual dimorphism) instead of speciation. In conclusion, core assumptions of sympatric speciation theory seem to be qualitatively reasonable for stickleback, but speciation may nevertheless fail because of (i) quantitative mismatches with theory and (ii) alternative evolutionary outcomes.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/942847
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Daniel I. Bolnick
spellingShingle Daniel I. Bolnick
Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?
International Journal of Ecology
author_facet Daniel I. Bolnick
author_sort Daniel I. Bolnick
title Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?
title_short Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?
title_full Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?
title_fullStr Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?
title_full_unstemmed Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?
title_sort sympatric speciation in threespine stickleback: why not?
publisher Hindawi Limited
series International Journal of Ecology
issn 1687-9708
1687-9716
publishDate 2011-01-01
description Numerous theoretical models suggest that sympatric speciation is possible when frequency-dependent interactions such as intraspecific competition drive disruptive selection on a trait that is also subject to assortative mating. Here, I review recent evidence that both conditions are met in lake populations of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Nonetheless, sympatric speciation appears to be rare or absent in stickleback. If stickleback qualitatively fit the theoretical requirements for sympatric speciation, why do they not undergo sympatric speciation? I present simulations showing that disruptive selection and assortative mating in stickleback, though present, are too weak to drive speciation. Furthermore, I summarize empirical evidence that disruptive selection in stickleback drives other forms of evolutionary diversification (plasticity, increased trait variance, and sexual dimorphism) instead of speciation. In conclusion, core assumptions of sympatric speciation theory seem to be qualitatively reasonable for stickleback, but speciation may nevertheless fail because of (i) quantitative mismatches with theory and (ii) alternative evolutionary outcomes.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/942847
work_keys_str_mv AT danielibolnick sympatricspeciationinthreespinesticklebackwhynot
_version_ 1725183535082373120