skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Don't ask “when is it coevolution?”—ask “how?”
Abstract Coevolution has come to be widely understood as specific, simultaneous, reciprocal adaptation by pairs of interacting species. This strict-sense definition arose from a desire for conceptual clarity, but it has never reflected the much wider diversity of ways in which interacting species may shape each other’s evolution. As a result, much of the literature on the evolutionary consequences of species interactions pays homage to the strict-sense definition while addressing some other form of coevolution. This tension suggests we should reframe the key question in coevolution research, from “when is it coevolution?” to, rather, “how is it coevolution?”. The result is not so much a definition of coevolution as a mission statement: We can describe how species coevolve by documenting the ways that each species shaped the other’s genetic diversity over a shared history of interaction. Making this change shifts our focus from identifying case studies for a single, narrowly defined process to describing the many ways—specific and diffuse, simultaneous and stepwise, and adaptive and nonadaptive—in which species evolve together.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2001180
PAR ID:
10644026
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Oxford University Press
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Evolution
ISSN:
0014-3820
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Elgar, Mark A. (Ed.)
    Coevolution—reciprocal evolutionary change between interacting lineages (Thompson, 1994; see Glossary)—is thought to have played a profound role in the evolution of Life on Earth. From similar patterns across the wings of unrelated lineages of butterflies (Hoyal Cuthill and Charleston, 2015), egg mimicry of “cheating” brood parasites (Davies, 2010), to the role of animal pollinators in driving the diversification of flowering plants (Kay and Sargent, 2009), to the ubiquity of sexual reproduction and sexual conflicts (Hamilton, 2002; Arnqvist and Rowe, 2005; King et al., 2009), the formation of the eukaryotic cell (Martin et al., 2015; Imachi et al., 2020), and even the origin of living organisms themselves (Mizuuchi and Ichihashi, 2018), evolutionary changes among interacting lineages have played profound and important roles in the history of Life. This Grand Challenges inaugural contribution encompasses eclectic opinions of the editorial board as to what are the next frontiers of coevolution research in the 21st century. Coevolutionary biology is a field that has garnered a lot of attention in recent years, in part as a result of technical advances in nucleotide sequencing and bioinformatics in the burgeoning field of host–microbial interactions. Many seminal studies of coevolution examined reciprocal evolutionary change between two or a few interacting macroscopic species that imposed selective pressures on one another (e.g., insect or bird pollinators and their flowering host plants). Understanding the contexts under which coevolution occurs, as opposed to scenarios in which each partner adapts independently to a particular environment (Darwin, 1862; Stiles, 1978) is important to elucidate coevolutionary processes. A whole spectrum of organismal interactions has been examined under the lens of coevolution, providing additional context, and nuance to ecological strategies traditionally categorized as ranging from beneficial to detrimental for participating species (Figure 1). In particular, a coevolutionary perspective has revealed that even “mutualisms” are not always fully beneficial or cooperative for the partners involved. Instead, the tendency to “cheat” permeates across symbiotic partnerships (Perez-Lamarque et al., 2020). Conversely, recent evidence suggests that non-lethal predation by co-evolved predators, which has traditionally been assumed to be entirely antagonistic, may provide sessile prey with some indirect benefit through enhanced opportunities to acquire beneficial symbiotic microorganisms (Grupstra et al., 2021). Herein, we discuss some of the recent areas of active research in coevolution, restricting our focus to coevolution between interacting species. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Fungus‐farming ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) have become model systems for exploring questions regarding the evolution of symbiosis. However, robust phylogenetic studies of both the ant agriculturalists and their fungal cultivars are necessary for addressing whether or not observed ant–fungus associations are the result of coevolution and, if so, whether that coevolution has been strict or diffuse. Here we focus on the evolutionary relationships of the species within the ant genusMyrmicocryptaand of their fungal cultivars. The fungus‐farming ant genusMyrmicocryptawas created by Fr. Smith in 1860 based on a single alate queen. Since then, 31 species and subspecies have been described. Until now, the genus has not received any taxonomic treatment and the relationships of the species within the genus have not been tested. Our molecular analyses, using ∼40 putative species and six protein‐coding (nuclear and mitochondrial) gene fragments, recoverMyrmicocryptaas monophyletic and as the sister group of the genusMycocepurusForel. The speciesM. tuberculataWeber is recovered as the sister to the rest ofMyrmicocrypta. The time‐calibrated phylogeny recovers the age of stem groupMyrmicocryptaplus its sister group as 45 Ma, whereas the inferred age for the crown groupMyrmicocryptais recovered as 27 Ma. Ancestral character‐state analyses suggest that the ancestor ofMyrmicocryptahad scale‐like or squamate hairs and that, although such hairs were once considered diagnostic for the genus, the alternative state of erect simple hairs has evolved at least seven independent times. Ancestral‐state analyses of observed fungal cultivar associations suggest that the most recent common ancestor ofMyrmicocryptacultivated clade 2 fungal species and that switches to clade 1 fungi have occurred at least five times. It is our hope that these results will encourage additional species‐level phylogenies of fungus‐farming ants and their fungal cultivars, which are necessary for understanding the evolutionary processes that gave rise to agriculture in ants and that produced the current diversity of mutualistic ant–fungus interactions. 
    more » « less
  3. Kormas, Konstantinos Aristomenis (Ed.)
    ABSTRACT The study of the mammalian microbiome serves as a critical tool for understanding host-microbial diversity and coevolution and the impact of bacterial communities on host health. While studies of specific microbial systems (e.g., in the human gut) have rapidly increased, large knowledge gaps remain, hindering our understanding of the determinants and levels of variation in microbiomes across multiple body sites and host species. Here, we compare microbiome community compositions from eight distinct body sites among 17 phylogenetically diverse species of nonhuman primates (NHPs), representing the largest comparative study of microbial diversity across primate host species and body sites. Analysis of 898 samples predominantly acquired in the wild demonstrated that oral microbiomes were unique in their clustering, with distinctive divergence from all other body site microbiomes. In contrast, all other body site microbiomes clustered principally by host species and differentiated by body site within host species. These results highlight two key findings: (i) the oral microbiome is unique compared to all other body site microbiomes and conserved among diverse nonhuman primates, despite their considerable dietary and phylogenetic differences, and (ii) assessments of the determinants of host-microbial diversity are relative to the level of the comparison (i.e., intra-/inter-body site, -host species, and -individual), emphasizing the need for broader comparative microbial analyses across diverse hosts to further elucidate host-microbial dynamics, evolutionary and biological patterns of variation, and implications for human-microbial coevolution. IMPORTANCE The microbiome is critical to host health and disease, but much remains unknown about the determinants, levels, and evolution of host-microbial diversity. The relationship between hosts and their associated microbes is complex. Most studies to date have focused on the gut microbiome; however, large gaps remain in our understanding of host-microbial diversity, coevolution, and levels of variation in microbiomes across multiple body sites and host species. To better understand the patterns of variation and evolutionary context of host-microbial communities, we conducted one of the largest comparative studies to date, which indicated that the oral microbiome was distinct from the microbiomes of all other body sites and convergent across host species, suggesting conserved niche specialization within the Primates order. We also show the importance of host species differences in shaping the microbiome within specific body sites. This large, comparative study contributes valuable information on key patterns of variation among hosts and body sites, with implications for understanding host-microbial dynamics and human-microbial coevolution. 
    more » « less
  4. A species can benefit or be hurt by other species. For example, honeybees and flowering plants help each other to flourish, while lions and gazelles behave in ways that decrease each other’s populations. Understanding these relationships is important for controlling pests and diseases. Sometimes it is easiest to study such interactions by looking at simple ones that happen on a small scale. Amoebas are common soil organisms that have the same basic organization as human cells. They are much larger and more complex than the bacteria that also live in the soil. How exactly the amoebas and bacteria interact in the soil is an important question, particularly as some of the bacteria can also live inside amoebas. Does this intimate relationship help or harm the amoeba? Shu, Brock, Geist et al. studied the relationship between a widely studied species of social amoeba and two species of bacteria that can live inside it. Some of the amoebas naturally contained one of the bacteria species, and others were infected with the bacteria in experiments. Throughout the entire life cycle of the amoebas, the bacteria lived inside them. During one part of the life cycle, amoebas form so-called fruiting bodies, which release spores that can develop into new amoebas. Shu et al. found that both types of bacteria alter the structure of the fruiting bodies in ways that reduce how well the spores disperse. One of the bacteria species, called Burkholderia hayleyella, harmed the amoebas a lot. It caused most harm to amoebas that do not naturally host the bacteria. This indicates that the amoebas that do host this species may have evolved to avoid its worst effects. The amoebas have many similarities to the white blood cells that clear bacteria from the human body. Certain bacteria can get inside white blood cells, causing diseases such as tuberculosis. Understanding how bacteria harm amoebas might be useful for understanding such diseases, and developing treatments for them. Though the bacteria Shu et al. studied are not toxic to humans, they are closely related to bacteria that are harmful. It is therefore possible that some bacteria that infect humans first evolve to infect amoebas. 
    more » « less
  5. Abstract Dormancy is an adaptation to living in fluctuating environments. It allows individuals to enter a reversible state of reduced metabolic activity when challenged by unfavorable conditions. Dormancy can also influence species interactions by providing organisms with a refuge from predators and parasites. Here we test the hypothesis that, by generating a seed bank of protected individuals, dormancy can modify the patterns and processes of antagonistic coevolution. We conducted a factorially designed experiment where we passaged a bacterial host (Bacillus subtilis) and its phage (SPO1) in the presence versus absence of a seed bank consisting of dormant endospores. Owing in part to the inability of phages to attach to spores, seed banks stabilized population dynamics and resulted in minimum host densities that were 30-fold higher compared to bacteria that were unable to engage in dormancy. By supplying a refuge to phage-sensitive strains, we show that seed banks retained phenotypic diversity that was otherwise lost to selection. Dormancy also stored genetic diversity. After characterizing allelic variation with pooled population sequencing, we found that seed banks retained twice as many host genes with mutations, whether phages were present or not. Based on mutational trajectories over the course of the experiment, we demonstrate that seed banks can dampen bacteria-phage coevolution. Not only does dormancy create structure and memory that buffers populations against environmental fluctuations, it also modifies species interactions in ways that can feed back onto the eco-evolutionary dynamics of microbial communities. 
    more » « less