Unconscious selection drove seed enlargement in vegetable crops.

Domesticated grain crops evolved from wild plants under human cultivation, losing natural dispersal mechanisms to become dependent upon humans, and showing changes in a suite of other traits, including increasing seed size. There is tendency for seed enlargement during domestication to be viewed as the result of deliberate selection for large seeds by early farmers. However, like some other domestication traits, large seeds may have evolved through natural selection from the activities of people as they gathered plants from the wild, or brought them into cultivation in anthropogenic settings. Alternatively, larger seeds could have arisen via pleiotropic effects or genetic linkage, without foresight from early farmers, and driven by selection that acted on other organs or favored larger plants. We have separated these unconscious selection effects on seed enlargement from those of deliberate selection, by comparing the wild and domesticated forms of vegetable crops. Vegetables are propagated by planting seeds, cuttings, or tubers, but harvested for their edible leaves, stems, or roots, so that seed size is not a direct determinant of yield. We find that landrace varieties of seven vegetable crops have seeds that are 20% to 2.5-times larger than those of their closest wild relatives. These domestication effect sizes fall completely within the equivalent range of 14% to 15.2-times for grain crops, although domestication had a significantly larger overall effect in grain than vegetable crops. Seed enlargement in vegetable crops that are propagated vegetatively must arise from natural selection for larger seeds on the occasions when plants recruit from seed and are integrated into the crop gene pool, or via a genetic link to selection for larger plants or organs. If similar mechanisms operate across all species, then unconscious selection during domestication could have exerted stronger effects on the seed size of our staple crops than previously realized.

C4 photosynthesis boosts growth by altering physiology, allocation and size.

C4 photosynthesis is a complex set of leaf anatomical and biochemical adaptations that have evolved more than 60 times to boost carbon uptake compared with the ancestral C3 photosynthetic type(1-3). Although C4 photosynthesis has the potential to drive faster growth rates(4,5), experiments directly comparing C3 and C4 plants have not shown consistent effects(1,6,7). This is problematic because differential growth is a crucial element of ecological theory(8,9) explaining C4 savannah responses to global change(10,11), and research to increase C3 crop productivity by introducing C4 photosynthesis(12). Here, we resolve this long-standing issue by comparing growth across 382 grass species, accounting for ecological diversity and evolutionary history. C4 photosynthesis causes a 19-88% daily growth enhancement. Unexpectedly, during the critical seedling establishment stage, this enhancement is driven largely by a high ratio of leaf area to mass, rather than fast growth per unit leaf area. C4 leaves have less dense tissues, allowing more leaves to be produced for the same carbon cost. Consequently, C4 plants invest more in roots than C3 species. Our data demonstrate a general suite of functional trait divergences between C3 and C4 species, which simultaneously drive faster growth and greater investment in water and nutrient acquisition, with important ecological and agronomic implications.

Degradation of rural and urban great tit song: testing transmission efficiency.

Acoustic signals play a fundamental role in avian territory defence and mate attraction. Several studies have now shown that spectral properties of bird song differ between urban and rural environments. Previously this has been attributed to competition for acoustic space as a result of low-frequency noise present in cities. However, the physical structure of urban areas may have a contributory effect. Here we investigate the sound degradation properties of woodland and city environments using both urban and rural great tit song. We show that although urban surroundings caused significantly less degradation to both songs, the transmission efficiency of rural song compared to urban song was significantly lower in the city. While differences between the two songs in woodland were generally minimal, some measures of the transmission efficiency of rural song were significantly lower than those of urban song, suggesting additional benefits to singing rural songs in this setting. In an attempt to create artificial urban song, we mimicked the increase in minimum frequency found several times previously in urban song. However, this did not replicate the same transmission properties as true urban song, suggesting changes in other song characteristics, such as temporal adjustments, are needed to further increase transmission of an avian signal in the city. We suggest that the structure of the acoustic environment, in addition to the background noise, plays an important role in signal adaptation.

Effects of urban noise on song and response behaviour in great tits.

Acoustic communication is fundamental in avian territory defence and mate attraction. In urban environments where sound transmissions are more likely to be masked by low-frequency anthropogenic noise, acoustic adaptations may be advantageous. However, minor modifications to a signal could affect its efficacy. While recent research has shown that there is divergence between songs from noisy and quiet areas, it is unknown whether these differences affect the response to the signal by its receivers. Here, we show that there is a difference in spectral aspects of rural and urban song in a common passerine, the great tit Parus major, at 20 sites across the UK. We also provide, to our knowledge, the first demonstration that such environmentally induced differences in song influence the response of male territory holders. Males from quiet territories exhibited a significantly stronger response when hearing song from another territory holder with low background noise than from those with high background noise. The opposite distinction in response intensity to homotypic versus heterotypic song was observed in males from noisy territories. This behavioural difference may intensify further signal divergence between urban and rural populations and raises important questions concerning signal evolution.