Abstract
Inbreeding effects have been detected in captive populations of threatened species, but the extent to which these effects translate into fitness under field conditions is mostly unknown. We address this issue by comparing the performance of replicated noninbred and inbred Drosophila lines under field and laboratory conditions. We asked whether environment‐dependent effects of inbreeding can be demonstrated for a field‐fitness component in Drosophila , the ability of flies to locate resources, and associated the results with results on effects of inbreeding investigated in the laboratory. Inbreeding effects were evident when releases were undertaken under warm conditions, but not under cold conditions, which illustrates the environment‐dependent nature of inbreeding depression. Inbreeding effects were much stronger in the field at warm temperatures than in laboratory stress tests, particularly for females. Effects of inbreeding based on performance in traditional inbreeding assays (viability, productivity) or from laboratory stress tests poorly predicted performance in the field. Inbreeding effects on resource location in the field can be strongly deleterious under some thermal conditions and involve traits not easily measured under laboratory conditions. More generally, inbreeding effects measured in captive populations may not necessarily predict their field performance, and programs to purge captive populations of deleterious alleles may not necessarily lead to fitness benefits in the wild.