Evolutionary Ecology by B. ShorrocksReview by: N. E. GilbertJournal of Animal Ecology, Vol. 54, No. 1 (Feb., 1985), pp. 337-338Published by: British Ecological SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4645 .

Accessed: 02/05/2014 23:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

British Ecological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofAnimal Ecology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 130.132.123.28 on Fri, 2 May 2014 23:18:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

work on other non-reptile species but to work on other reptiles in Asia, Africa and Europe which would have strengthened and added more dimensions to this multi-authored undertaking. This apparent attitude of introvertedness, although not diminishing the value of their contributions to American lizard ecology, is further highlighted by the absence of any consideration of the current evolutionary concepts which are taxing ecologists' minds in many parts of the world apart from the States; such as evolutionary stable strategies, inclusive fitness, group selection and the ecology of sex. These problems, some of which were identified by the author of the conclusion to the book, have been addressed by other reptile research workers who have been studying populations with marked individuals. Since relatively few books emerge each year on reptile ecology I hope future books will be somewhat broader in aspect.

This is an excellent book for the initiated and is generally well written. I do not like the way the references are organized under chapter headings at the back which gets in the way of using this work efficiently. It does, however, point to the problem of methodology (the lack of standardiza- tion) and the resulting difficulty of wondering what a particular worker actually measured. The fact that much of the past work is also anecdotal, and can pass into the literature as accepted folklore, is also criticized. I would recommend this book to the specialist who has not kept up with what has been happening in the States and as a general reference text for institutional libraries.

I. R. SWINGLAND

P. Lebrun, H. M. Andre, A. De Medts, C. Gregoire-Wibo & G. Wauthy (Eds) (1983). New Trends in Soil Biology. Pp. 709. Proceedings of the 8th International Colloquium of Soil Zoology. Dieu-Brichart, Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. No price quoted.

The editors must be congratulated on the rapid publication of this collection of ninety-four full papers and poster papers. The conference ended in September 1982, and the volume was published only 9 months later. The authorship of the papers is truly international, with twenty-six countries represented from six of the seven continents (and the seventh is covered by two papers from the British Antarctic Survey).

The Proceedings have four themes: the role played by the soil fauna in mineral cycling, population and community dynamics, the function of soil animals in man-made and modified environments, and ecophysiology. Each theme has an opening review paper, and then a series of papers discussing various individual topics. The majority of the papers are written in English, with a small minority in French or German.

The ecophysiologists appear to be on the defensive, with G. Vannier presenting a long paper on why a study of the physiology of soil organisms is important, and W. Block concluding that ecophysiology is a discipline in its own right. Some interesting points emerge when considering restoration of communities, whether 2-3-year studies of the soil fauna are sufficiently long-term, and whether the Collembola can be used as 'bio-indicators'. Studies of mineral cycling, and of the groups of soil organisms most closely involved, are providing useful information, especially in relation to the release of elements from plant litter (cf. the paper by J. M. Anderson, P. E. Ineson & S. A. Huish). D. Parkinson's review of the functional relationships between soil organisms, perhaps implicitly rather than explicitly, points out that little is still known about the population and community dynamics of the soil fauna.

As with many conferences this volume contains a sprinkling of good papers, a lot of rather mediocre ones, and some that the editors presumably included so as not to give offence to the authors. In the volume I perceive few new trends but perhaps rather more in the way of consolida- tion of old concepts in soil biology.

M. B. USHER

Shorrocks, B. (Ed.) (1984). Evolutionary Ecology: 23rd Symposium of the British Ecological Society. Pp. viii + 418. Blackwell, Oxford. Price ?25.80.

Population geneticists have generally ignored ecological complications and vice versa. Yet the two interact (Morris 1971). Both population genetics and population ecology, consist of (1) empirical

work on other non-reptile species but to work on other reptiles in Asia, Africa and Europe which would have strengthened and added more dimensions to this multi-authored undertaking. This apparent attitude of introvertedness, although not diminishing the value of their contributions to American lizard ecology, is further highlighted by the absence of any consideration of the current evolutionary concepts which are taxing ecologists' minds in many parts of the world apart from the States; such as evolutionary stable strategies, inclusive fitness, group selection and the ecology of sex. These problems, some of which were identified by the author of the conclusion to the book, have been addressed by other reptile research workers who have been studying populations with marked individuals. Since relatively few books emerge each year on reptile ecology I hope future books will be somewhat broader in aspect.

This is an excellent book for the initiated and is generally well written. I do not like the way the references are organized under chapter headings at the back which gets in the way of using this work efficiently. It does, however, point to the problem of methodology (the lack of standardiza- tion) and the resulting difficulty of wondering what a particular worker actually measured. The fact that much of the past work is also anecdotal, and can pass into the literature as accepted folklore, is also criticized. I would recommend this book to the specialist who has not kept up with what has been happening in the States and as a general reference text for institutional libraries.

I. R. SWINGLAND

P. Lebrun, H. M. Andre, A. De Medts, C. Gregoire-Wibo & G. Wauthy (Eds) (1983). New Trends in Soil Biology. Pp. 709. Proceedings of the 8th International Colloquium of Soil Zoology. Dieu-Brichart, Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. No price quoted.

The editors must be congratulated on the rapid publication of this collection of ninety-four full papers and poster papers. The conference ended in September 1982, and the volume was published only 9 months later. The authorship of the papers is truly international, with twenty-six countries represented from six of the seven continents (and the seventh is covered by two papers from the British Antarctic Survey).

The Proceedings have four themes: the role played by the soil fauna in mineral cycling, population and community dynamics, the function of soil animals in man-made and modified environments, and ecophysiology. Each theme has an opening review paper, and then a series of papers discussing various individual topics. The majority of the papers are written in English, with a small minority in French or German.

The ecophysiologists appear to be on the defensive, with G. Vannier presenting a long paper on why a study of the physiology of soil organisms is important, and W. Block concluding that ecophysiology is a discipline in its own right. Some interesting points emerge when considering restoration of communities, whether 2-3-year studies of the soil fauna are sufficiently long-term, and whether the Collembola can be used as 'bio-indicators'. Studies of mineral cycling, and of the groups of soil organisms most closely involved, are providing useful information, especially in relation to the release of elements from plant litter (cf. the paper by J. M. Anderson, P. E. Ineson & S. A. Huish). D. Parkinson's review of the functional relationships between soil organisms, perhaps implicitly rather than explicitly, points out that little is still known about the population and community dynamics of the soil fauna.

As with many conferences this volume contains a sprinkling of good papers, a lot of rather mediocre ones, and some that the editors presumably included so as not to give offence to the authors. In the volume I perceive few new trends but perhaps rather more in the way of consolida- tion of old concepts in soil biology.

M. B. USHER

Shorrocks, B. (Ed.) (1984). Evolutionary Ecology: 23rd Symposium of the British Ecological Society. Pp. viii + 418. Blackwell, Oxford. Price ?25.80.

Population geneticists have generally ignored ecological complications and vice versa. Yet the two interact (Morris 1971). Both population genetics and population ecology, consist of (1) empirical

work on other non-reptile species but to work on other reptiles in Asia, Africa and Europe which would have strengthened and added more dimensions to this multi-authored undertaking. This apparent attitude of introvertedness, although not diminishing the value of their contributions to American lizard ecology, is further highlighted by the absence of any consideration of the current evolutionary concepts which are taxing ecologists' minds in many parts of the world apart from the States; such as evolutionary stable strategies, inclusive fitness, group selection and the ecology of sex. These problems, some of which were identified by the author of the conclusion to the book, have been addressed by other reptile research workers who have been studying populations with marked individuals. Since relatively few books emerge each year on reptile ecology I hope future books will be somewhat broader in aspect.

This is an excellent book for the initiated and is generally well written. I do not like the way the references are organized under chapter headings at the back which gets in the way of using this work efficiently. It does, however, point to the problem of methodology (the lack of standardiza- tion) and the resulting difficulty of wondering what a particular worker actually measured. The fact that much of the past work is also anecdotal, and can pass into the literature as accepted folklore, is also criticized. I would recommend this book to the specialist who has not kept up with what has been happening in the States and as a general reference text for institutional libraries.

I. R. SWINGLAND

P. Lebrun, H. M. Andre, A. De Medts, C. Gregoire-Wibo & G. Wauthy (Eds) (1983). New Trends in Soil Biology. Pp. 709. Proceedings of the 8th International Colloquium of Soil Zoology. Dieu-Brichart, Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. No price quoted.

The editors must be congratulated on the rapid publication of this collection of ninety-four full papers and poster papers. The conference ended in September 1982, and the volume was published only 9 months later. The authorship of the papers is truly international, with twenty-six countries represented from six of the seven continents (and the seventh is covered by two papers from the British Antarctic Survey).

The Proceedings have four themes: the role played by the soil fauna in mineral cycling, population and community dynamics, the function of soil animals in man-made and modified environments, and ecophysiology. Each theme has an opening review paper, and then a series of papers discussing various individual topics. The majority of the papers are written in English, with a small minority in French or German.

The ecophysiologists appear to be on the defensive, with G. Vannier presenting a long paper on why a study of the physiology of soil organisms is important, and W. Block concluding that ecophysiology is a discipline in its own right. Some interesting points emerge when considering restoration of communities, whether 2-3-year studies of the soil fauna are sufficiently long-term, and whether the Collembola can be used as 'bio-indicators'. Studies of mineral cycling, and of the groups of soil organisms most closely involved, are providing useful information, especially in relation to the release of elements from plant litter (cf. the paper by J. M. Anderson, P. E. Ineson & S. A. Huish). D. Parkinson's review of the functional relationships between soil organisms, perhaps implicitly rather than explicitly, points out that little is still known about the population and community dynamics of the soil fauna.

As with many conferences this volume contains a sprinkling of good papers, a lot of rather mediocre ones, and some that the editors presumably included so as not to give offence to the authors. In the volume I perceive few new trends but perhaps rather more in the way of consolida- tion of old concepts in soil biology.

M. B. USHER

Shorrocks, B. (Ed.) (1984). Evolutionary Ecology: 23rd Symposium of the British Ecological Society. Pp. viii + 418. Blackwell, Oxford. Price ?25.80.

Population geneticists have generally ignored ecological complications and vice versa. Yet the two interact (Morris 1971). Both population genetics and population ecology, consist of (1) empirical

Reviews Reviews Reviews 337 337 337

This content downloaded from 130.132.123.28 on Fri, 2 May 2014 23:18:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

field studies and (2) mathematical theories. In both areas, the theories have little detectable relevance to events in the field, but the mathematics of theoretical population genetics is far more sophisticated than that of theoretical population ecology, and is based (rather precariously) on the known facts of Mendelian inheritance. Field studies in population genetics have concentrated on visible polymorphisms such as snail banding patterns or melanistic moths; and more recently, on electrophoretic variation. It has proved practically impossible to identify the full ecological consequence of such polymorphisms, or to compare the fitnesses of the different genotypes through- out the life cycle. Consequently, interest is shifting to characters of known ecological significance, such as fecundity and survival. This lands up in the morass of quantitative genetics. It is not possible to deduce, from phenotypic measurements, the underlying genetic architecture of such characters. All we can do is make limited statistical predictions, from parents to offspring. Fortunately, for ecological purposes, that is all that is needed. And that is precisely what that great ecological pioneer, Frank Morris, did many years ago. He used offspring-parent regressions to predict and verify, in the field, changes in the genetic quality of natural populations. He did so because those changes profoundly affect the population dynamics (Morris 1971).

The Birmingham school of biometrical genetics is 'rather optimistic' (R. A. Fisher, personal communication). Its methods purport to analyse, in detail, the genetic variation of quantitative characters. They are open to severe statistical and genetical objections: few geneticists outside Birmingham now accept them. Falconer (1981)-the standard work on quantitative genetics- adopts a far more cautious approach; better still are the purely statistical methods of offspring/ parent regression and combining abilities, which make no genetical assumptions at all. It is therefore alarming to find the extreme views of the Birmingham school expounded (by Lawrence) in this symposium, since unwary ecologists might accept them as gospel. Fortunately, Christiansen mentions some of the genetical difficulties, which are discussed more thoroughly by Lewontin (19 74) and Falconer (1981).

This Symposium, then, is supposed to integrate genetics and ecology. Twelve of the chapters pay lip service to that idea, but might equally well have appeared in strictly genetical, or in strictly ecological, publications. Mostly, they are theoretical. But the other four authors really try to marry genetics and ecology. Bradshaw reviews standard ideas of quantitative and population genetics, with many ecological illustrations. Barrett and Pimentel both examine the genetics and ecology of host-parasite relationships. The star turn is the co-adaptation of myxoma virus and Australian rabbits, where both the genetic changes and the ecological mechanisms are documented. Finally, Mani attempts a purely theoretical combination of ecology and genetics. Throughout the Symposium, there are lamentations about the absence of empirical studies which genuinely combine both aspects of population biology.

What we need are accurate comparisons of the ecological success of different genotypes, in the field, throughout the life-cycle, over several generations. That is a tall order, but it can be done. Astonishingly, the Symposium doesn't even mention the various attempts to do it. Nothing about Morris (1971) or van Noordwijk et al. (1981); only a passing reference to the entire volume of Dingle & Hegmann (1982); not a word about the field studies of Berry (1977) and O'Donald (1983 and earlier). One wonders why not?

REFERENCES

Berry, R. J. (1977). Inheritance and Natural History. Collins, London. Dingle, H. & Hegmann, J. P. (Eds.) (1982). Evolution and Genetics of Life Histories. Springer, New York. Falconer, D. S. (1981). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Longman, London. Lowontin, R. C. (1974). The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Columbia U.P., New York. Morris, R. F. (1971). Observed and simulated changes in genetic quality in natural populations of Hyphantria

cunea. Canadian Entomologist, 103, 893-906. O'Donald, P. (1983). The Arctic Skua. Cambridge U.P. van Noordwijk, A. J., van Balen, J. H. & Scharloo, W. (1981). Genetic variation in the timing of reproduction

in the Great Tit. Oecologia, 49, 158-166.

N. E. GILBERT

338 Reviews

This content downloaded from 130.132.123.28 on Fri, 2 May 2014 23:18:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions