International Journal of Ecology / 2011 / Article / Fig 1

Review Article

Sympatric Speciation in Threespine Stickleback: Why Not?

Figure 1

Illustration of the evidence for phenotypic and diet variation, phenotype-diet correlation, disruptive selection, and assortative mating in stickleback. (a) Phenotypic variation in gill raker length within a population of stickleback (First Lake, 2008; [22]). (b) Diet variation within a population of stickleback (First Lake, 2008; [22]) indicated by the high variance in carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios δ 13C and δ 15N compared to the variance observed when individuals all consume the same set of prey (thick cross over the centroid represents ±2 s.d., based on lab-raised stickleback [23]). Adjusting for baseline isotopic variation (thin arrow indicates a benthic primary consumer [snails], thick arrow represents a planktivorous primary consumer [mussels]), individual stickleback fall anywhere from 0% to 100% benthic carbon. Because of the correlation between δ 13C and δ 15N, the first isotopic principal component axis can be used to represent the axis from benthic to limnetic diets. (c) Phenotypic and diet variation are correlated: fish with longer gill rakers tend to consume a more limnetic diet (high values of isotopic PC1 indicate lower δ 13C, higher δ 15N; First Lake). (d) Assortative mating by diet, indicated by a positive correlation between males' isotopic signature and the isotopes from eggs (indicative of female diet; modified from [23]). (e) A key measure of trophic morphology, gill raker length, is subject to disruptive selection as indicated by a significant quadratic coefficient in a regression of growth rate on size-standardized gill raker length. (First Lake, 2005; modified from [24]). Growth rate was measured using a biochemical index, the ratio of RNA to DNA in muscle tissue. The relationships in each panel of this figure are repeatable across multiple solitary lake populations.

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.