The adaptive landscape as a conceptual bridge between micro- and macroevolution.

By S. Arnold, M. Pfrender, A. Jones. 2001

211 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5028ddf6f5db4c029def21e22c38daa82d52906f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

A reassessment of genetic limits to evolutionary change (2005, background): “If a fitness peak lies in the direction of another eigenvector of G, gmax will have little effect on the evolution of the population (Arnold et al. 2001: Fig.”
Neuronal boost to evolutionary dynamics (2015, background): “These ideas are analogous to previous ones from quantitative genetics that consider mutational effects to be adaptive [44–46].”
Constraints and reinforcement on adaptation under climate change: Selection of genetically correlated traits (2007, background): “load (Lande and Shannon, 1996; Bu¨rger and Krall, 2004)) describes relative reduction in fitness (Hedrick, 2000; Arnold et al., 2001 ).”
The strain concept in phytoplankton ecology (2009, unknown): “occurring in an n-dimensional adaptive landscape (Arnold et al., 2001).”
The pace of modern life II: from rates of contemporary microevolution to pattern and process. (2001, background): “The integration of these factors determines the rate of evolution in natural populations (�� z = Gβ β β; Endler, 1986; Falconer, 1989; Roff, 1997; Schluter, 2000; Arnold, Pfrender & Jones, 2001 ).”
Adaptive Radiation, Ecological Opportunity, and Evolutionary Determinism (2010, background): “A quantitative metric of ecological opportunity would probably require estimating selection on an adaptive landscape (reviewed in Fear and Price 1998; Schluter 2000; Arnold et al. 2001).”
Contemporary evolution of secondary sexual traits in the wild (2007, background): “Journal compilation © 2007 British Ecological Society, Functional Ecology , 21 , 422‐433 factors operating on the trait(s) that are subject to stabilizing (or conflicting) selection would remain entirely constant over a large number of generations, leading instead to a slowly moving optimum, perhaps”
Adaptation and Fitness in Animal Populations: Evolutionary and Breeding Perspectives on Genetic Resource Management (2009, background): “…but recent papers (primarily reviews) that provide an introduction to these developments include papers in the special issue of Genetica (Hendry and Kinnison 2001 – particularly Agrawal et al. 2001, Arnold et al. 2001 and Wade 2001), Blows (2007), Blows and Hoffmann (2005) and Carter et al. (2005).”
Developmental Dynamics and G-Matrices: Can Morphometric Spaces be Used to Model Phenotypic Evolution? (2008, background): “…in phenotypic means is a function of drift, selection and the matrix of additive genetic variances and covariances, G. Drift is a function of population size and G, selection is a function of fitness, which can be described by an adaptive landscape (Lande 1976; Arnold et al. 2001; Gavrilets 2004).”
Measuring rates of phenotypic evolution and the inseparability of tempo and mode (2012, methodology): “Over much longer periods of time, divergence is controlled by how the peaks themselves move in response to changing selective conditions (Arnold et al. 2001; Estes and Arnold 2007).”
Heritability is not Evolvability (2011, background): “In this case we do not expect variation in evolutionary potential across traits and populations to have much explanatory value, and macroevolutionary patterns can be understood mainly in terms of selection dynamics (e.g. Schluter 2000; Arnold et al. 2001; Estes and Arnold 2007; Futuyma 2010).”
Linear Discrimination, Ordination, and the Visualization of Selection Gradients in Modern Morphometrics (2011, unknown): “It is the direction of steepest increase in the the adaptive landscape, the surface of log mean fitness (Lande 1979; Arnold et al. 2001): bi ¼ o ln W o zi : Algebraically, the surface of relative fitness (the selection surface) is equivalent to the likelihood ratio surface in a classification…”