Display options
Cite
Marshall DJ, Lawton RJ, Monro K, et al. Biochemical evolution in response to intensive harvesting in algae: Evolution of quality and quantity. Evol Appl. 2018;11(8):1389-1400doi: 10.1111/eva.12632.
Marshall, D. J., Lawton, R. J., Monro, K., & Paul, N. A. (2018). Biochemical evolution in response to intensive harvesting in algae: Evolution of quality and quantity. Evolutionary applications, 11(8), 1389-1400. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12632
Marshall, Dustin J, et al. "Biochemical evolution in response to intensive harvesting in algae: Evolution of quality and quantity." Evolutionary applications vol. 11,8 (2018): 1389-1400. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12632
Marshall DJ, Lawton RJ, Monro K, Paul NA. Biochemical evolution in response to intensive harvesting in algae: Evolution of quality and quantity. Evol Appl. 2018 May 01;11(8):1389-1400. doi: 10.1111/eva.12632. eCollection 2018 Sep. PMID: 30151047; PMCID: PMC6099826.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Evol Appl. 2018 May 01;11(8):1389-1400. doi: 10.1111/eva.12632. eCollection 2018 Sep.

Biochemical evolution in response to intensive harvesting in algae: Evolution of quality and quantity.

Evolutionary applications

Dustin J Marshall, Rebecca J Lawton, Keyne Monro, Nicholas A Paul

Affiliations

  1. Centre for Geometric Biology/School of Biological Sciences Monash University Melbourne Vic. Australia.
  2. MACRO-the Centre for Macroalgal Resources and Biotechnology James Cook University Townsville QLD Australia.
  3. Bay of Plenty Regional Council Mount Maunganui New Zealand.
  4. Faculty of Science, Health, Education and Engineering University of the Sunshine Coast Maroochydore QLD Australia.

PMID: 30151047 PMCID: PMC6099826 DOI: 10.1111/eva.12632

Abstract

Evolutionary responses to indirect selection pressures imposed by intensive harvesting are increasingly common. While artificial selection has shown that biochemical components can show rapid and dramatic evolution, it remains unclear as to whether intensive harvesting can inadvertently induce changes in the biochemistry of harvested populations. For applications such as algal culture, many of the desirable bioproducts could evolve in response to harvesting, reducing cost-effectiveness, but experimental tests are lacking. We used an experimental evolution approach where we imposed heavy and light harvesting regimes on multiple lines of an alga of commercial interest for twelve cycles of harvesting and then placed all lines in a common garden regime for four cycles. We have previously shown that lines in a heavy harvesting regime evolve a "live fast" phenotype with higher growth rates relative to light harvesting regimes. Here, we show that algal biochemistry also shows evolutionary responses, although they were temporarily masked by differences in density under the different harvesting regimes. Heavy harvesting regimes, relative to light harvesting regimes, had reduced productivity of desirable bioproducts, particularly fatty acids. We suggest that commercial operators wishing to maximize productivity of desirable bioproducts should maintain mother cultures, kept at higher densities (which tend to select for desirable phenotypes), and periodically restart their intensively harvested cultures to minimize the negative consequences of biochemical evolution. Our study shows that the burgeoning algal culture industry should pay careful attention to the role of evolution in intensively harvested crops as these effects are nontrivial if subtle.

Keywords: crop production; experimental evolution; harvesting

References

  1. Evol Appl. 2009 Aug;2(3):312-23 - PubMed
  2. PLoS One. 2014 Jul 07;9(7):e101284 - PubMed
  3. Food Chem. 2016 Jan 1;190:856-863 - PubMed
  4. Evol Appl. 2009 Aug;2(3):394-414 - PubMed
  5. Oecologia. 1981 Jul;49(3):287-292 - PubMed
  6. PLoS One. 2013 Nov 22;8(11):e81631 - PubMed
  7. J Phycol. 2014 Feb;50(1):216-26 - PubMed
  8. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2006 Feb 2;831(1-2):176-83 - PubMed
  9. Ecol Lett. 2006 Feb;9(2):142-8 - PubMed
  10. Evol Appl. 2011 Mar;4(2):159-83 - PubMed
  11. PLoS One. 2013 May 22;8(5):e64168 - PubMed
  12. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2009 Jan 1;102(1):100-12 - PubMed
  13. Am Nat. 2009 Feb;173(2):151-63 - PubMed
  14. PLoS One. 2014 Mar 06;9(3):e90223 - PubMed
  15. Bioresour Technol. 2015 Feb;178:147-156 - PubMed
  16. J Anim Ecol. 2007 Jul;76(4):669-78 - PubMed
  17. Bioresour Technol. 2014 Mar;155:334-41 - PubMed
  18. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2004 Nov;65(6):635-48 - PubMed
  19. Trends Ecol Evol. 1998 Mar;13(3):117-20 - PubMed
  20. Evolution. 2005 Jun;59(6):1259-67 - PubMed
  21. PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e38857 - PubMed
  22. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jul 19;102(29):10218-20 - PubMed

Publication Types