Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Evolutionary diversification in stickleback affects ecosystem functioning


Explaining the ecological causes of evolutionary diversification is a major focus of biology, but surprisingly little has been said about the effects of evolutionary diversification on ecosystems1,2,3. The number of species in an ecosystem and their traits are key predictors of many ecosystem-level processes, such as rates of productivity, biomass sequestration and decomposition4,5. Here we demonstrate short-term ecosystem-level effects of adaptive radiation in the threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) over the past 10,000 years. These fish have undergone recent parallel diversification in several lakes in coastal British Columbia, resulting in the formation of two specialized species (benthic and limnetic) from a generalist ancestor6. Using a mesocosm experiment, we demonstrate that this diversification has strong effects on ecosystems, affecting prey community structure, total primary production, and the nature of dissolved organic materials that regulate the spectral properties of light transmission in the system. However, these ecosystem effects do not simply increase in their relative strength with increasing specialization and species richness; instead, they reflect the complex and indirect consequences of ecosystem engineering by sticklebacks. It is well known that ecological factors influence adaptive radiation7,8. We demonstrate that adaptive radiation, even over short timescales, can have profound effects on ecosystems.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Differences in community structure and productivity among treatments.
Figure 2: Dissolved organic content and light transmission across treatments.


  1. 1

    Thompson, J. N. Rapid evolution as an ecological process. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 329–332 (1998)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Fussmann, G. F., Loreau, M. & Abrams, P. A. Eco-evolutionary dynamics of communities and ecosystems. Funct. Ecol. 21, 465–477 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Yoshida, T., Jones, L. E., Ellner, S. P., Fussmann, G. F. & Hairston, N. G. Rapid evolution drives ecological dynamics in a predator–prey system. Nature 424, 303–306 (2003)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Schmitz, O. J. Predators have large effects on ecosystem properties by changing plant diversity not plant biomass. Ecology 87, 1432–1437 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Loreau, M. et al. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294, 804–808 (2001)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    McPhail, J. D. Ecology and evolution of sympatric sticklebacks (Gasterosteus): origin of the species pairs. Can. J. Zool. 71, 515–523 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Schluter, D. The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation (Oxford Univ. Press, 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Seehausen, O. et al. Speciation through sensory drive in cichlid fish. Nature 455, 620–626 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Losos, J. B. Portrait of an Adaptive Radiation: Ecology and Evolution of Anolis Lizards (Univ. California Press, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Grant, P. R. & Grant, B. R. How and Why Species Multiply: The Radiation of Darwin’s Finches (Princeton Univ. Press, 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Abrams, P. A. The evolution of predator–prey interactions: theory and evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31, 79–105 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Palkovacs, E. P. & Post, D. M. Experimental evidence that phenotypic divergence in predators drives community divergence in prey. Ecology 90, 300–305 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Snyder, W. E., Snyder, G. B., Finke, D. L. & Straub, C. S. Predator biodiversity strengthens herbivore suppression. Ecol. Lett. 9, 789–796 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Lennon, J. T. & Martiny, J. B. H. Rapid evolution buffers ecosystem impacts of viruses in a microbial food web. Ecol. Lett. 11, 1178–1188 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Erwin, D. H. Macroevolution of ecosystem engineering, niche construction and diversity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 304–310 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Colosimo, P. F. et al. Widespread parallel evolution in sticklebacks by repeated fixation of ectodysplasin alleles. Science 307, 1928–1933 (2005)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Rundle, H. D., Nagel, L., Boughman, J. W. & Schluter, D. Natural selection and parallel speciation in sympatric sticklebacks. Science 287, 306–308 (2000)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Boughman, J. W. Divergent sexual selection enhances reproductive isolation in sticklebacks. Nature 411, 944–947 (2001)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Bell, T., Neill, W. E. & Schluter, D. The effect of temporal scale on the outcome of trophic cascade experiments. Oecologia 134, 578–586 (2003)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Schmitz, O. J. Effects of predator hunting mode on grassland ecosystem function. Science 319, 952–954 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Goudard, A. & Loreau, M. Non-trophic interactions, biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: an interaction web model. Am. Nat. 171, 91–106 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Stibor, H. et al. Copepods act as a switch between alternative trophic cascades in marine pelagic food webs. Ecol. Lett. 7, 321–328 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Jones, C. G., Lawton, J. H. & Shachak, M. Positive and negative effects of organisms as physical ecosystem engineers. Ecology 78, 1946–1957 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Mazumder, A., Taylor, W. D., McQueen, D. J. & Lean, D. R. S. Effects of fish and plankton on lake temperature and mixing depth. Science 247, 312–315 (1990)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Williamson, C. E., Morris, D. P., Pace, M. L. & Olson, A. G. Dissolved organic carbon and nutrients as regulators of lake ecosystems: Resurrection of a more integrated paradigm. Limnol. Oceanogr. 44, 795–803 (1999)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Retamal, L., Vincent, W. F., Martineau, C. & Osburn, C. L. Comparison of the optical properties of dissolved organic matter in two river-influenced coastal regions of the Canadian arctic. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 72, 261–272 (2007)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Ghan, D., McPhail, J. D. & Hyatt, K. D. The temporal-spatial pattern of vertical migration by the freshwater copepod Skistodiaptomus oregonensis relative to predation risk. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55, 1350–1363 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Obernosterer, I. & Benner, R. Competition between biological and photochemical processes in the mineralization of dissolved organic carbon. Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 117–124 (2004)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    McKnight, D. M. et al. Spectrofluorometric characterization of dissolved organic matter for indication of precursor organic material and aromaticity. Limnol. Oceanogr. 46, 38–48 (2001)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Pienitz, R. & Vincent, W. F. Effect of climate change relative to ozone depletion on UV exposure in subarctic lakes. Nature 404, 484–487 (2000)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


We thank A. Albert, T. Vines, D. Yim, P. Tamkee, J. Courchesne, R. Barrett, K. Marchinko, M. Arnegard, J. Sashaw, J. Gosling, S. Hausch, J. Rosenfeld and S. Rogers for assistance in the laboratory and the field. We thank E. B. Rosenblum and members of the Harmon laboratory for comments on the manuscript.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luke J. Harmon.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Notes and Data, Supplementary Figure S1 with Legend and Supplementary References (PDF 528 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harmon, L., Matthews, B., Des Roches, S. et al. Evolutionary diversification in stickleback affects ecosystem functioning. Nature 458, 1167–1170 (2009).

Download citation

Further reading


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing