Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2003 Jul 22;270(1523):1433–1440. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2372

The role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution.

Trevor D Price 1, Anna Qvarnström 1, Darren E Irwin 1
PMCID: PMC1691402  PMID: 12965006

Abstract

Models of population divergence and speciation are often based on the assumption that differences between populations are due to genetic factors, and that phenotypic change is due to natural selection. It is equally plausible that some of the differences among populations are due to phenotypic plasticity. We use the metaphor of the adaptive landscape to review the role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution. Moderate levels of phenotypic plasticity are optimal in permitting population survival in a new environment and in bringing populations into the realm of attraction of an adaptive peak. High levels of plasticity may increase the probability of population persistence but reduce the likelihood of genetic change, because the plastic response itself places the population close to a peak. Moderate levels of plasticity arise whenever multiple traits, some of which are plastic and others not, form a composite trait involved in the adaptive response. For example, altered behaviours may drive selection on morphology and physiology. Because there is likely to be a considerable element of chance in which behaviours become established, behavioural change followed by morphological and physiological evolution may be a potent force in driving evolution in novel directions. We assess the role of phenotypic plasticity in stimulating evolution by considering two examples from birds: (i) the evolution of red and yellow plumage coloration due to carotenoid consumption; and (ii) the evolution of foraging behaviours on islands. Phenotypic plasticity is widespread in nature and may speed up, slow down, or have little effect on evolutionary change. Moderate levels of plasticity may often facilitate genetic evolution but careful analyses of individual cases are needed to ascertain whether plasticity has been essential or merely incidental to population differentiation.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (131.2 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Ancel L. W. A quantitative model of the Simpson-Baldwin Effect. J Theor Biol. 1999 Jan 21;196(2):197–209. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1998.0833. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ancel L. W. Undermining the Baldwin expediting effect: does phenotypic plasticity accelerate evolution? Theor Popul Biol. 2000 Dec;58(4):307–319. doi: 10.1006/tpbi.2000.1484. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Behera N., Nanjundiah V. An investigation into the role of phenotypic plasticity in evolution. J Theor Biol. 1995 Feb 7;172(3):225–234. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1995.0019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowmaker J. K., Kovach J. K., Whitmore A. V., Loew E. R. Visual pigments and oil droplets in genetically manipulated and carotenoid deprived quail: a microspectrophotometric study. Vision Res. 1993 Mar-Apr;33(5-6):571–578. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(93)90180-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brush A. H. Metabolism of carotenoid pigments in birds. FASEB J. 1990 Sep;4(12):2969–2977. doi: 10.1096/fasebj.4.12.2394316. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Clegg Sonya M., Owens Ian P. F. The 'island rule' in birds: medium body size and its ecological explanation. Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Jul 7;269(1498):1359–1365. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Eshel I., Matessi C. Canalization, genetic assimilation and preadaptation. A quantitative genetic model. Genetics. 1998 Aug;149(4):2119–2133. doi: 10.1093/genetics/149.4.2119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Gerard J. F., Vancassel M., Laffort B. Spread of phenotypic plasticity or genetic assimilation: the possible role of genetic constraints. J Theor Biol. 1993 Oct 7;164(3):341–349. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1993.1158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Goldsmith T. H., Collins J. S., Licht S. The cone oil droplets of avian retinas. Vision Res. 1984;24(11):1661–1671. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(84)90324-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Grant Peter R., Grant B. Rosemary. Unpredictable evolution in a 30-year study of Darwin's finches. Science. 2002 Apr 26;296(5568):707–711. doi: 10.1126/science.1070315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lande R. Expected time for random genetic drift of a population between stable phenotypic states. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1985 Nov;82(22):7641–7645. doi: 10.1073/pnas.82.22.7641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Morgan C. L. ON MODIFICATION AND VARIATION. Science. 1896 Nov 20;4(99):733–740. doi: 10.1126/science.4.99.733. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Tebbich S., Taborsky M., Fessl B., Blomqvist D. Do woodpecker finches acquire tool-use by social learning? Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Nov 7;268(1482):2189–2193. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1738. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. WADDINGTON C. H. Canalization of development and genetic assimilation of acquired characters. Nature. 1959 Jun 13;183(4676):1654–1655. doi: 10.1038/1831654a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. WADDINGTON C. H. Genetic assimilation. Adv Genet. 1961;10:257–293. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2660(08)60119-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES