Factors influencing progress toward sympatric speciation
Article first published online: 27 JUN 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02348.x
© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Evolutionary Biology © 2011 European Society For Evolutionary Biology
Additional Information
How to Cite
THIBERT-PLANTE, X. and HENDRY, A. P. (2011), Factors influencing progress toward sympatric speciation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 24: 2186–2196. doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02348.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 12 SEP 2011
- Article first published online: 27 JUN 2011
- Received 11 March 2011; revised 26 May 2011; accepted 31 May 2011
Keywords:
- adaptive divergence;
- adaptive radiation;
- competition;
- disruptive selection;
- divergent environment;
- ecological speciation;
- individual-based modelling;
- mate choice;
- resource shape;
- sympatric speciation
Abstract
Many factors could influence progress towards sympatric speciation. Some of the potentially important ones include competition, mate choice and the degree to which alternative sympatric environments (resources) are discrete. What is not well understood is the relative importance of these different factors, as well as interactions among them. We use an individual-based numerical model to investigate the possibilities. Mate choice was modelled as the degree to which male foraging traits influence female mate choice. Competition was modelled as the degree to which individuals with different phenotypes compete for portions of the resource distribution. Discreteness of the environment was modelled as the degree of bimodality of the underlying resource distribution. We find that strong mate choice was necessary, but not sufficient, to cause sympatric speciation. In addition, sympatric speciation was most likely when the resource distribution was strongly bimodal and when competition among different phenotypes was intermediate. Even under these ideal conditions, however, sympatric speciation occurred only a fraction of the time. Sympatric speciation owing to competition on unimodal resource distributions was also possible, but much less common. In all cases, stochasticity played an important role in determining progress towards sympatric speciation, as evidenced by variation in outcomes among replicate simulations for a given set of parameter values. Overall, we conclude that the nature of competition is much less important for sympatric speciation than is the nature of mate choice and the underlying resource distribution. We argue that an increased understanding of the promoters and inhibitors of sympatric speciation is best achieved through models that simultaneously evaluate multiple potential factors.

1420-9101/asset/JEB_left.gif?v=1&s=cdd0a87e0640cdbe1b969dbbd029d612b7a1748a)
1420-9101/asset/JEB_right.gif?v=1&s=1566ac71d957297ac097f5a646bcb0098128b801)
