The evolution of fitness in life-history theory.

J E Brommer
{"title":"The evolution of fitness in life-history theory.","authors":"J E Brommer","doi":"10.1017/s000632310000551x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Theory concerning the evolution of life history (the schedule of reproduction and survival) focuses on describing the life history which maximises fitness. Although there is an intuitive link between life history and fitness, there are in fact several measures of the 'black box' concept of fitness. There has been a debate in the bio-mathematical literature on the predictive difference between the two most commonly used measures; intrinsic rate of increase r and net reproductive ratio R0. Although both measures aim to describe fitness, models using one of the measures may predict the opposite of similar models using the other measure, which is clearly undesirable. Here, I review the evolution of these fitness measures over the last four decades, the predictive differences between these measures and the resulting shift of the fitness concept. I focus in particular on some recent developments, which have solved the dilemma of predictive differences between these fitness measures by explicitly acknowledging the game-theoretical nature of life-history evolution.</p>","PeriodicalId":8893,"journal":{"name":"Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/s000632310000551x","citationCount":"50","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s000632310000551x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 50

Abstract

Theory concerning the evolution of life history (the schedule of reproduction and survival) focuses on describing the life history which maximises fitness. Although there is an intuitive link between life history and fitness, there are in fact several measures of the 'black box' concept of fitness. There has been a debate in the bio-mathematical literature on the predictive difference between the two most commonly used measures; intrinsic rate of increase r and net reproductive ratio R0. Although both measures aim to describe fitness, models using one of the measures may predict the opposite of similar models using the other measure, which is clearly undesirable. Here, I review the evolution of these fitness measures over the last four decades, the predictive differences between these measures and the resulting shift of the fitness concept. I focus in particular on some recent developments, which have solved the dilemma of predictive differences between these fitness measures by explicitly acknowledging the game-theoretical nature of life-history evolution.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生命史理论中的适应性进化。
关于生命史进化的理论(繁殖和生存的时间表)侧重于描述使适应性最大化的生命史。虽然生活史和健康之间有一种直观的联系,但实际上有几种衡量健康“黑箱”概念的方法。在生物数学文献中,关于两种最常用的测量方法之间的预测差异一直存在争议;内在增长率r和净繁殖比R0。尽管这两种方法都旨在描述适合度,但使用其中一种方法的模型可能与使用另一种方法的类似模型预测相反,这显然是不可取的。在这里,我回顾了过去四十年来这些健身指标的演变,这些指标之间的预测差异以及由此产生的健身概念的转变。我特别关注最近的一些进展,这些进展通过明确承认生命史进化的博弈论本质,解决了这些适应度测量之间预测差异的困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
99
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information The diet of early birds based on modern and fossil evidence and a new framework for its reconstruction Biological Invasion Theories: Merging Perspectives from Population, Community and Ecosystem Scales Consistent trade‐offs in ecosystem services between land covers with different production intensities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1