Phylogenetic reconstruction of ancestral ecological networks through time for pierid butterflies and their host plants

Abstract

The study of herbivorous insects underpins much of the theory that concerns the evolution of species interactions. In particular, Pieridae butterflies and their host plants have served as a model system for studying evolutionary arms races. To learn more about the coevolution of these two clades, we reconstructed ancestral ecological networks using stochastic mappings that were generated by a phylogenetic model of host‐repertoire evolution. We then measured if, when, and how two ecologically important structural features of the ancestral networks (modularity and nestedness) evolved over time. Our study shows that as pierids gained new hosts and formed new modules, a subset of them retained or recolonised the ancestral host(s), preserving connectivity to the original modules. Together, host‐range expansions and recolonisations promoted a phase transition in network structure. Our results demonstrate the power of combining network analysis with Bayesian inference of host‐repertoire evolution to understand changes in complex species interactions over time.

What Goes in Must Come Out? The Metabolic Profile of Plants and Caterpillars, Frass, and Adults of Asota (Erebidae: Aganainae) Feeding on Ficus (Moraceae) in New Guinea

“…Ficus biogeography is similarly complex, offering a range of opportunities for expansion of a comparative approach to explore selection in gene ow in Asota and other Ficus-feeding Aganainae. Asota and Ficus would therefore make an excellent system for further studying the evolution of detoxi cation and other metabolic strategies, as well as a useful comparison to other insect groups as more powerful predictive methods are developed (Braga et al 2021). (i.e., leaf, caterpillar, frass and adult) and the Ficus or Asota species from which they were collected.…”

Ehrlich and Raven escape and radiate coevolution hypothesis at different levels of organization: Past and future perspectives

“…By retaining the ability of using ancestral hosts, alternative macroevolutionary dynamics may be generated, in which specialization in lineages oscillates across time (the oscillation hypothesis; Nylin and Janz 2008;Nylin et al 2018), leading to nested host ranges across clades of herbivores (Braga et al 2018). Thus, extreme variation in network structure will depend on details of the escape-and-radiate dynamics, such as the likelihood of a novel herbivore species to retain the interactions of their ancestral species in addition to exploring the formerly unavailable plant resources (Braga et al 2021). In this sense, the complex network patterns empirically observed in plant-butterfly networks suggest that the interplay between host switching and host retention is shaping diversification and patterns of interaction between plants and herbivores across large temporal scales (Braga et al 2018(Braga et al , 2021.…”

“…Thus, extreme variation in network structure will depend on details of the escape-and-radiate dynamics, such as the likelihood of a novel herbivore species to retain the interactions of their ancestral species in addition to exploring the formerly unavailable plant resources (Braga et al 2021). In this sense, the complex network patterns empirically observed in plant-butterfly networks suggest that the interplay between host switching and host retention is shaping diversification and patterns of interaction between plants and herbivores across large temporal scales (Braga et al 2018(Braga et al , 2021.…”

“…It is important to note that other processes may also lead to modular ecological networks. For example, modules may be generated by different macroevolutionary regimes (Braga et al 2018(Braga et al , 2021 or by arms race dynamics without diversification (Andreazzi et al 2017). Moreover, ecological dynamics in antagonisms may favor the emergence of modules due to habitat heterogeneity (Pimm and Lawton 1980) or to differential extinction of interacting species (Thébault and Fontaine 2010).…”

Food web reconstruction through phylogenetic transfer of low-rank network representation

“…Finally, species interactions at macro-ecological scales seem to respond mostly to macro-evolutionary processes (Price 2003); which is evidenced by the presence of conserved backbones in food webs (Dalla Riva and Stouffer 2016), strong evolutionary signature on prey choice (Stouffer et al 2012), and strong phylogenetic signature in food web intervality (Eklöf and Stouffer 2016). Phylogenetic reconstruction has also previously been used to understand ancestral plant-insect interaction networks (Braga et al 2021). Taken together, these considerations suggest that phylogenies can reliably be used to transfer knowledge on species interactions.…”