Effects of rapid evolution on species coexistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing evidence for rapid evolution suggests that the maintenance of species diversity in ecological communities may be influenced by more than purely ecological processes. Classic theory shows that interspecific competition may select for traits that increase niche differentiation, weakening competition and thus promoting species coexistence. While empirical work has demonstrated trait evolution in response to competition, if and how evolution affects the dynamics of the competing species—the key step for completing the required eco-evolutionary feedback—has been difficult to resolve. Here, we show that evolution in response to interspecific competition feeds back to change the course of competitive population dynamics of aquatic plant species over 10–15 generations in the field. By manipulating selection imposed by heterospecific competitors in experimental ponds, we demonstrate that ( i ) interspecific competition drives rapid genotypic change, and ( ii ) this evolutionary change in one competitor, while not changing the coexistence outcome, causes the population trajectories of the two competing species to converge. In contrast to the common expectation that interspecific competition should drive the evolution of niche differentiation, our results suggest that genotypic evolution resulted in phenotypic changes that altered population dynamics by affecting the competitive hierarchy. This result is consistent with theory suggesting that competition for essential resources can limit opportunities for the evolution of niche differentiation. Our finding that rapid evolution regulates the dynamics of competing species suggests that ecosystems may rely on continuous feedbacks between ecology and evolution to maintain species diversity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".