Recent theory predicts that the sizes of cells will evolve according to fluctuations in body temperature. Smaller cells speed metabolism during periods of warming but require more energy to maintain and repair. To evaluate this theory, we studied the evolution of cell size in populations of Drosophila melanogaster held at either a constant temperature (16°C or 25°C) or fluctuating temperatures (16 and 25°C). Populations that evolved at fluctuating temperatures or a constant 25°C developed smaller thoraxes, wings, and cells than did flies exposed to a constant 16°C. The cells of flies from fluctuating environments were intermediate in size to those of flies from constant environments. Most genetic variation in cell size was independent of variation in wing size, suggesting that cell size was a target of selection. These evolutionary patterns accord with patterns of developmental plasticity documented previously. Future studies should focus on the mechanisms that underlie the selective advantage of small cells at high or fluctuating temperatures.

Natural selection alters the distribution of a trait in a population and indirectly alters the distribution of genetically correlated traits. Long-standing models of thermal adaptation assume that trade-offs exist between fitness at different temperatures; however, experimental evolution often fails to reveal such trade-offs. Here, we show that adaptation to benign temperatures in experimental populations of Drosophila melanogaster resulted in correlated responses at the boundaries of the thermal niche. Specifically, adaptation to fluctuating temperatures (16–25°C) decreased tolerance of extreme heat. Surprisingly, flies adapted to a constant temperature of 25°C had greater cold tolerance than did flies adapted to other thermal conditions, including a constant temperature of 16°C. As our populations were never exposed to extreme temperatures during selection, divergence of thermal tolerance likely reflects indirect selection of standing genetic variation via linkage or pleiotropy. We found no relationship between heat and cold tolerances in these populations. Our results show that the thermal niche evolves by direct and indirect selection, in ways that are more complicated than assumed by theoretical models.

The locomotor capacity of amphibians depends strongly on temperature and hydration. Understanding the potential interactions between these variables remains an important challenge because temperature and water availability covary strongly in natural environments. We explored the effects of temperature and hydration on the hopping speeds of Rhinella granulosa, a small toad from the semiarid Caatinga and the Atlantic Rain Forest in Brazil. We asked whether thermal and hydric states interact to determine performance and whether toads from the Caatinga differ from their conspecifics from the Atlantic Forest. Both dehydration and cooling impaired hopping speed, but effects were independent of one another. In comparison to performances of other anurans, the performance of R. granulosa was far less sensitive to dehydration. Consequently, dehydrated members of this species may be able to sustain performance through high body temperatures, which agrees with the exceptional heat tolerance of this species. Surprisingly, toads from both the Caatinga and the Atlantic Forest were relatively insensitive to dehydration. This observation suggests that migration or gene flow between toads from the forest and those from a drier region occurred or that toads from a dry region colonized the forest secondarily.

High temperatures can stress animals by raising the oxygen demand above the oxygen supply. Consequently, animals under hypoxia could be more sensitive to heating than those exposed to normoxia. Although support for this model has been limited to aquatic animals, oxygen supply might limit the heat tolerance of terrestrial animals during energetically demanding activities. We evaluated this model by studying the flight performance and heat tolerance of flies (Drosophila melanogaster) acclimated and tested at different concentrations of oxygen (12%, 21%, and 31%). We expected that flies raised at hypoxia would develop into adults that were more likely to fly under hypoxia than would flies raised at normoxia or hyperoxia. We also expected flies to benefit from greater oxygen supply during testing. These effects should have been most pronounced at high temperatures, which impair locomotor performance. Contrary to our expectations, we found little evidence that flies raised at hypoxia flew better when tested at hypoxia or tolerated extreme heat better than did flies raised at normoxia or hyperoxia. Instead, flies raised at higher oxygen levels performed better at all body temperatures and oxygen concentrations. Moreover, oxygen supply during testing had the greatest effect on flight performance at low temperature, rather than high temperature. Our results poorly support the hypothesis that oxygen supply limits performance at high temperatures, but do support the idea that hyperoxia during development improves performance of flies later in life.