Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 2016:groups:g2:start [2015/11/28 16:14] – [References] lemos
+++ 2016:groups:g2:start [2024/01/09 18:45] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
-Wiki site of the practical exercise of the [[http://www.ictp-saifr.org/mathbio4|IV Southern-Summer School on Mathematical Biology]].
+Wiki site of the practical exercise of the [[http://www.ictp-saifr.org/mathbio5|V Southern-Summer School on Mathematical Biology]].
 Here you will find the exercise assignment and the group's products.
@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 If you are a group member login to edit this page, create new pages from it, and upload files.
-==== Introduction ====
+===== Introduction =====
-Different selective pressures drive the evolution of species traits. As a consequence, some traits are polymorphic
+The evolution of species traits is driven by different selective pressures which can be determined by species interactions. If different interactions can lead to distinct selective pressures, the overall combination of each interaction's relative contribution can select species traits. //Primula farinosa// is a perennial herb with two different types of floral morphs, a short morph and a tall morph. Antagonistic interactions such as herbivores consuming flowers favor a short floral morph, whereas pollinators are more attracted by a tall floral morph. Ågren and colleagues (2013) found that geographical variation in the distribution of floral morphs from //P. farinosa// is correlated with the variation in the strength of interaction with herbivores and pollinators.
+{{:2016:groups:g2:captura_de_tela_2015-11-30_a_s_11.53.50.png?nolink&350|Floral Morph}} //P. farinosa// floral morphs
 ===== Assignment =====
+Propose a simple but realistic mathematical model that unravels the relative contribution of mutualistic //vs.// antagonistic interactions for the adaptive differentiation of floral morph in this system. Use this model to explore the ecological and/or evolutionary consequences of the proposed dynamics.
 ===== Proposed questions =====
+  *Floral dimorphism in //Primula farinosa// is geographically structured. Can a simple model, with no explicit spatial structure result in floral dimorphism?
+  *How the strength of each type of interaction (mutualistic and antagonistic) determines the frequencies of floral morphs?
 ===== References =====
-  *Ågren et al. (2013) //Mutualists and antagonists drive among-population variation in selection and evolution of floral display in a perennial herb// Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences vol.110 no.45 pp. 18202-18207 [[http://www.pnas.org/content/110/45/18202.full|link]]
+  *Ågren //et al.// (2013) //Mutualists and antagonists drive among-population variation in selection and evolution of floral display in a perennial herb// Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences vol.110 no.45 pp. 18202-18207 [[http://www.pnas.org/content/110/45/18202.full|link]]
+  *Vanhoenacker //et al.// (2013) //Non-linear relationship between intensity of plant–animal
+interactions and selection strength// Ecology Letters vol. 16 pp. 198-205 [[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12029/full|link]]