3 results
Chapter Fourteen - From genes to ecosystems
-
- By Joseph K. Bailey, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Jennifer A. Schweitzer, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Francisco Úbeda, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Benjamin M. Fitzpatrick, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Mark A. Genung, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Clara C. Pregitzer, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Matthew Zinkgraf, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Thomas G. Whitham, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Arthur Keith, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Julianne M. O’Reilly-Wapstra, Bradley M. Potts, School of Plant Science, University of Tasmania, Brian J. Rehill, Department of Chemistry, US Naval Academy, Carri J. LeRoy, Environmental Studies Program, The Evergreen State College, Dylan G. Fischer, Environmental Studies Program, The Evergreen State College
- Edited by Glenn R. Iason, Marcel Dicke, Wageningen Universiteit, The Netherlands, Susan E. Hartley, University of York
-
- Book:
- The Ecology of Plant Secondary Metabolites
- Published online:
- 05 August 2012
- Print publication:
- 19 April 2012, pp 269-286
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Relatively little is understood about the extent to which evolution in one species can result in changes to associated communities and ecosystems, the potential mechanisms responsible for those changes (genetic drift, gene flow or natural selection), the phenotypes or candidate genes that may link ecological and evolutionary dynamics, or the role of rapid evolution and feedbacks. However, linking genes and ecosystems in this manner is fundamental to placing community structure and ecosystem function in an evolutionary framework. This is not an easy endeavour as the field of community genetics is multi-disciplinary (Whitham et al., 2006), and ecological and evolutionary dynamics occur at different spatial and temporal scales. Recent reviews show that plant genetic variation can have extended consequences at the community and ecosystem level (extended phenotype; Whitham et al., 2003) affecting arthropod diversity, soil microbial communities, trophic interactions, carbon dynamics and soil nitrogen availability (Whitham et al., 2006; Johnson & Stinchcombe, 2007; Hughes et al., 2008; Bailey et al., 2009a). Its effects are not limited to single systems or even foundation species, but are common across broadly distributed plant and animal systems, and can have effects at the community and ecosystem level of similar magnitude to traditional ecological factors, such as differences among species (Bailey et al., 2009a, b).
Theory in the fields of community genetics (Shuster et al., 2006; Whitham et al., 2006) and co-evolution (Thompson, 2005) also supports the connection between evolutionary and ecological dynamics (Johnson et al., 2009). Multiple investigators argue that community and ecosystem phenotypes represent complex traits related to variation in the fitness consequences of inter-specific indirect genetic effects (IIGEs) (Thompson, 2005; Shuster et al., 2006; Whitham et al., 2006; Tetard-Jones et al., 2007). In their most basic form, IIGEs occur when the genotype of one individual affects the phenotype and fitness of an associated individual of a different species (Moore et al.,1997; Agrawal et al., 2001; Shuster et al., 2006; Wade, 2007). Such interactions are important in the geographic mosaic theory of co-evolution (Thompson, 2005), the development of community heritability (Shuster et al., 2006) and non-additive responses of community structure, biodiversity and ecosystem function (Bailey et al., 2009a). Empirical evidence for the effects of plant genetic variation on communities and ecosystems, paired with growing theoretical models explaining evolutionary mechanisms for these results, provides a solid foundation for understanding how evolutionary processes, such as drift and selection, may affect community structure and ecosystem function.
Contributors
-
- By Claude Alain, Amy F. T. Arnsten, Lars Bäckman, Malcolm A. Binns, Sandra E. Black, S. Thomas Carmichael, Keith D. Cicerone, Maurizio Corbetta, Bruce Crosson, Jeffrey L. Cummings, Deirdre R. Dawson, Michael deRiesthal, Roger A. Dixon, Laura Eggermont, Kirk I. Erickson, Anthony Feinstein, Susan M. Fitzpatrick, Fu Qiang Gao, Douglas D. Garrett, Omar Ghaffar, Robbin Gibb, Elizabeth L. Glisky, Martha L. Glisky, Leslie J. Gonzalez Rothi, Cheryl L. Grady, Carol Greenwood, Gerri Hanten, Richard G. Hunter, Masud Husain, Narinder Kapur, Bryan Kolb, Arthur F. Kramer, Susan A. Leon, Harvey S. Levin, Brian Levine, Nadina Lincoln, Thomas W. McAllister, Edward McAuley, Bruce S. McEwen, David M. Morris, Stephen E. Nadeau, Roshan das Nair, Matthew Parrott, Jennie Ponsford, George P. Prigatano, Joel Ramirez, John M. Ringman, Ian H. Robertson, Amy D. Rodriguez, John C. Rosenbek, Bernhard Ross, Erik Scherder, Victoria Singh-Curry, Trudi Stickland, Donald T. Stuss, Edward Taub, Gary R. Turner, Harry V. Vinters, Samuel Weiss, John Whyte, Barbara A. Wilson, Gordon Winocur, J. Martin Wojtowicz
- Edited by Donald T. Stuss, University of Toronto, Gordon Winocur, University of Toronto, Ian H. Robertson, Trinity College, Dublin
-
- Book:
- Cognitive Neurorehabilitation
- Published online:
- 05 September 2015
- Print publication:
- 11 September 2008, pp ix-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
A Dea Nutrix Figurine from a Romano-British Cemetery at Baldock, Hertfordshire
- Gilbert R. Burleigh, Keith J. Fitzpatrick-Matthews, Miranda J. Aldhouse-Green
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
An unusually complex fourth-century infant grave excavated in Baldock in 1988 produced a complete Dea Nutrix figurine. Whilst not uncommon as site finds, Deae Nutrices are less frequently encountered as grave gifts in Britain than in Gaul. The reasons for its inclusion as a grave gift are explored, as are wider questions of Romano-British burial practice in the town, the significance of Dea Nutrix as a deity, and the nature of funerary ritual. An assessment is also made of the status of the Roman town.
![](/core/cambridge-core/public/images/lazy-loader.gif)