Phenotypic and dispersal plasticity are not alternative strategies for organisms to face thermal changes

To buffer the effects of local environmental changes, organisms may modify their phenotypic traits (i.e. phenotypic plasticity) or disperse towards other potential habitats (i.e. dispersal plasticity). Despite extensive work studying either 'local phenotypic plasticity' or 'dispersal plasticity' independently, little is known about their potential covariation and interplay. These strategies are classically viewed as alternatives. However, this expectation has been challenged by theoretical work suggesting that they may instead evolve together under some environmental contexts. Here, we experimentally quantified morphological, movement and dispersal plasticity in response to thermal changes in 12 strains of the ciliate Tetrahymena thermophila. We showed that phenotypic and dispersal plasticity are not alternative strategies, with half of the strains expressing simultaneously all dimensions of plasticity in response to thermal changes. Furthermore, the extent of morphological and movement plasticity weakly but significantly differed between residents and dispersers. Interestingly, we found no covariation between these different plasticity dimensions, suggesting that they may evolve independently, which pleads for studying which environmental contexts favour the evolution of each. The fact that phenotypic and dispersal plasticity are not alternative strategies and may affect the expression of one another opens interesting perspectives about their joint evolution and the potential consequences of their interplay.