Search for: All records

Abstract A major challenge in evolutionary biology is explaining how populations navigate rugged fitness landscapes without getting trapped on local optima. One idea illustrated by adaptive dynamics theory is that as populations adapt, their newly enhanced capacities to exploit resources alter fitness payoffs and restructure the landscape in ways that promote speciation by opening new adaptive pathways. While there have been indirect tests of this theory, to our knowledge none have measured how fitness landscapes deform during adaptation, or test whether these shifts promote diversification. Here, we achieve this by studying bacteriophage$$\lambda$$ $\lambda$, a virus that readily speciates into co-existing receptor specialists under controlled laboratory conditions. We use a high-throughput gene editing-phenotyping technology to measure$$\lambda$$ $\lambda$’s fitness landscape in the presence of different evolved-$$\lambda$$ $\lambda$competitors and find that the fitness effects of individual mutations, and their epistatic interactions, depend on the competitor. Using these empirical data, we simulate$$\lambda$$ $\lambda$’s evolution on an unchanging landscape and one that recapitulates how the landscape deforms during evolution.$$\lambda$$ $\lambda$heterogeneity only evolves in the shifting landscape regime. This study provides a test of adaptive dynamics, and, more broadly, shows how fitness landscapes dynamically change during adaptation, potentiating phenomena like speciation by opening new adaptive pathways. 

During the struggle for survival, populations occasionally evolve new functions that give them access to untapped ecological opportunities. Theory suggests that coevolution between species can promote the evolution of such innovations by deforming fitness landscapes in ways that open new adaptive pathways. We directly tested this idea by using high-throughput gene editing-phenotyping technology (MAGE-Seq) to measure the fitness landscape of a virus, bacteriophage λ, as it coevolved with its host, the bacterium Escherichia coli . An analysis of the empirical fitness landscape revealed mutation-by-mutation-by-host-genotype interactions that demonstrate coevolution modified the contours of λ’s landscape. Computer simulations of λ’s evolution on a static versus shifting fitness landscape showed that the changes in contours increased λ’s chances of evolving the ability to use a new host receptor. By coupling sequencing and pairwise competition experiments, we demonstrated that the first mutation λ evolved en route to the innovation would only evolve in the presence of the ancestral host, whereas later steps in λ’s evolution required the shift to a resistant host. When time-shift replays of the coevolution experiment were run where host evolution was artificially accelerated, λ did not innovate to use the new receptor. This study provides direct evidence for the role of coevolution in driving evolutionary novelty and provides a quantitative framework for predicting evolution in coevolving ecological communities. 

Abstract Viruses and their hosts can undergo coevolutionary arms races where hosts evolve increased resistance and viruses evolve counter‐resistance. Given these arms race dynamics (ARD), both players are predicted to evolve along a single trajectory as more recently evolved genotypes replace their predecessors. By coupling phenotypic and genomic analyses of coevolving populations of bacteriophageλandEscherichia coli, we find conflicting evidence for ARD. Virus‐host infection phenotypes fit the ARD model, yet genomic analyses revealed fluctuating selection dynamics. Rather than coevolution unfolding along a single trajectory, cryptic genetic variation emerges and is maintained at low frequency for generations until it eventually supplants dominant lineages. These observations suggest a hybrid ‘leapfrog’ dynamic, revealing weaknesses in the predictive power of standard coevolutionary models. The findings shed light on the mechanisms that structure coevolving ecological networks and reveal the limits of using phenotypic or genomic data alone to differentiate coevolutionary dynamics.