Host resistance and coevolution in spatially structured populations

Best, Alex; Webb, S. David; White, Andrew; Boots, Mike

doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1978

Cited by 65 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our work complements the growing body of research on the effects of spatial structure on coevolutionary dynamics (Hartvigsen and Levin 1997;Boots and Sasaki 1999;Haraguchi and Sasaki 2000;Read and Keeling 2003;Jansen and van Baalen 2006;Kerr et al 2006;Mitchell et al 2006;Heilmann et al 2010Heilmann et al , 2012Best et al 2011;Haerter et al 2011;Zaman et al 2011). There are also strong links between this study and a variety of ecological models on victim-exploiter relationships.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…Similarly, theoretical studies have generally been limited to metapopulation analyses (Frank 1993;Gandon et al 1996Gandon et al , 2008Damgaard 1999), which incorporate a certain degree of spatial structure but do not capture local interactions between individuals within subpopulations, which are known to be critical in many epidemiological scenarios (Rand et al 1995;Rhodes and Anderson 1996;Keeling et al 2001;Eames and Keeling 2002). Individual-based models are able to capture local interactions and have been used to study a diverse set of biological phenomena including the evolution of life histories and virulence (Boots and Sasaki 1999;Haraguchi and Sasaki 2000;Read and Keeling 2003;Heilmann et al 2010), altruism (Jansen and van Baalen 2006), and various other aspects of coevolution (Hartvigsen and Levin 1997; Kerr et al 2006;Mitchell et al 2006;Best et al 2011;Haerter et al 2011;Zaman et al 2011;Heilmann et al 2012). However, the role of local interactions on range expansion has yet to be determined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial Structure Mitigates Fitness Costs in Host-Parasite Coevolution

Ashby

Gupta

Buckling

2014

The American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Online enhancements: appendixes, code files. abstract:The extent of population mixing is known to influence the coevolutionary outcomes of many host and parasite traits, including the evolution of generalism (the ability to resist or infect a broad range of genotypes). While the segregation of populations into interconnected demes has been shown to influence the evolution of generalism, the role of local interactions between individuals is unclear. Here, we combine an individual-based model of microbial communities with a well-established framework of genetic specificity that matches empirical observations of bacterium-phage interactions. We find the evolution of generalism in well-mixed populations to be highly sensitive to the severity of associated fitness costs, but the constraining effect of costs on the evolution of generalism is lessened in spatially structured populations. The contrasting outcomes between the two environments can be explained by different scales of competition (i.e., global vs. local). These findings suggest that local interactions may have important effects on the evolution of generalism in host-parasite interactions, particularly in the presence of high fitness costs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Structure Mitigates Fitness Costs in Host-Parasite Coevolution

Ashby

Gupta

Buckling

2014

The American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is reminiscent of branching found in an SI type model when density-dependent natural mortality is included (Svennungsen & Kisdi [45] which is an extension of Pugliese [46]; see also [47]). The result extends the range of disease models for which branching has been demonstrated; among which already are counted models incorporating density-dependent death [45,46], superinfection [48,49], 'specialist' parasitism [50][51][52] and selective predation [53]. When DDV evolves together with baseline virulence in our main model, however, and both population feedbacks have adaptive traits, mutual invasibility becomes impossible and no branching can occur.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Seasonality selects for more acutely virulent parasites when virulence is density dependent

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Host condition is often likely to influence parasite virulence. Furthermore, condition may often be correlated with host density, and therefore, it is important to understand the role of density-dependent virulence (DDV). We examine the consequences of DDV to the evolution of parasites in both seasonal and non-seasonal environments. In particular, we consider seasonality in host birth rate that results in a fluctuating host density and therefore a variable virulence. We show that parasites are selected for lower exploitation, and therefore lower transmission and virulence as the strength of DDV increases without seasonality. This is an important insight from our models; DDV has the opposite effect on the evolution of parasites to that of higher baseline mortality. Our key result is that although seasonality does not affect the evolution of virulence in classical models, with DDV parasites in seasonal environments are predicted to evolve to be more acute. This suggests that in more seasonal environments wildlife disease is likely to be more rather than less virulent if DDV is widespread.

show abstract

“…For instance, how hosts encounter parasites in time and space is expected to influence the evolution of parasite virulence and host resistance (Boots & Mealor ; Wild, Gardner & West ; Best et al . ) and the potential for host–parasite local adaptation (Kawecki & Ebert ; Foster et al . ; Gandon & Nuismer ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispersal in a patchy landscape reveals contrasting determinants of infection in a wild avian malaria system

Knowles

Wood

Alves

et al. 2013

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1.Understanding exactly when, where and how hosts become infected with parasites is critical to understanding host-parasite co-evolution in natural populations. However, for host-parasite systems in which hosts or parasites are mobile, for example in vector-borne diseases, the spatial location of infection and the relative importance of parasite exposure at successive host lifehistory stages are often uncertain. 2. Here, using a 6-year longitudinal data set from a spatially referenced population of blue tits, we test the extent to which infection by avian malaria parasites is determined by conditions experienced at natal or breeding sites, as well as by postnatal dispersal between the two. 3. We show that the location and timing of infection differs markedly between two sympatric malaria parasite species. For one species (Plasmodium circumflexum), our analyses indicate that infection occurs after birds have settled on breeding territories, and because the distribution of this parasite is temporally stable across years, hosts born in malarious areas could in principle alter their exposure and potentially avoid infection through postnatal dispersal. Conversely, the spatial distribution of another parasite species (Plasmodium relictum) is unpredictable and infection probability is positively associated with postnatal dispersal distance, potentially indicating that infection occurs during this major dispersal event. 4. These findings suggest that hosts in this population may be subject to divergent selection pressures from these two parasites, potentially acting at different life-history stages. Because this implies parasite species-specific predictions for many coevolutionary processes, they also illustrate the complexity of predicting such processes in multi-parasite systems.

show abstract

Host resistance and coevolution in spatially structured populations

Cited by 65 publications

References 45 publications

Spatial Structure Mitigates Fitness Costs in Host-Parasite Coevolution

Spatial Structure Mitigates Fitness Costs in Host-Parasite Coevolution

Seasonality selects for more acutely virulent parasites when virulence is density dependent

Dispersal in a patchy landscape reveals contrasting determinants of infection in a wild avian malaria system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About