Review
Experimental coevolution of species interactions

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.02.009Get rights and content

Coevolution, the process of reciprocal adaptation and counter-adaptation between ecologically interacting species, affects most organisms and is considered a key force structuring biological diversity. Our understanding of the pattern and process of coevolution, particularly of antagonistic species interactions, has been hugely advanced in recent years by an upsurge in experimental studies that directly observe coevolution in the laboratory. These experiments pose new questions by revealing novel facets of the coevolutionary process not captured by current theory, while also providing the first empirical tests of longstanding coevolutionary ideas, including the influential Red Queen hypothesis. In this article, we highlight emerging directions for this field, including experimental coevolution of mutualistic interactions and understanding how pairwise coevolutionary processes scale up within species-rich communities.

Section snippets

The rise of experimental coevolution

Naturalists have long recognized the importance of species interactions as a driving force of adaptation. Indeed, 19th-century evolutionary biologists often cited the conspicuous co-adaptations of interspecific pollination and mimicry mutualisms (see Glossary) as exemplars of evolution by natural selection. It is perhaps surprising then that coevolution, the process of reciprocal adaptation and counter-adaptation by ecologically interacting species, was not studied in earnest until the mid-20th

The tempo and mode of antagonistic coevolution

According to the Red Queen hypothesis, reciprocal selection arising from interspecific antagonisms, such as host–parasite interactions, should accelerate evolutionary rates through the need for continual adaptation and counter-adaptation 8, 9. (The history of the use of the Red Queen metaphor is described in 10, 11.) Recent tests of this prediction have compared evolutionary rates under coevolution against controls where coevolution is prevented, for example, in the presence versus absence of

Emerging directions in experimental coevolution

The major contributions of experimental coevolution thus far have been to provide direct evidence of the tempo and mode of antagonistic coevolutionary dynamics, the role of antagonistic coevolution in increasing diversity within and among populations, including the role of parasitism in maintaining sexual recombination, and the structure of specificity in coevolving antagonistic interactions. However, as the field matures, it is taking some exciting new directions; in what follows, we outline

Concluding remarks and potential for application

Overall, experimental evolution has afforded remarkable strides forward in understanding population-level responses to selection, the underlying genetics of adaptation, and the limits of evolution [64]. Although still in its infancy, experimental coevolution has great potential for informing understanding of community stability, species invasions, and the spread of disease and, as such, holds promise in more applied fields, most notably human health. Experimental coevolution techniques have

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the reviewers for constructive comments on a previous version of this manuscript. This work was supported by a project grant (NE/H005080/1) to M.A.B. and a research fellowship (R16150) to B.K. from the Natural Environment Research Council (UK).

Glossary

Antagonistic coevolution and/or interspecific antagonism
coevolution is the reciprocal adaptation and counter-adaptation of species that interact ecologically. When the fitnesses of the two species are negatively correlated, such that an adaptation that increases fitness in one species decreases in the fitness of the other species and vice versa, these species interactions are termed ‘antagonistic’.
Antagonistic pleiotropy
a situation where one gene underlies more than one trait, and where one

References (85)

  • S. Gaba et al.

    Time-shift experiments as a tool to study antagonistic coevolution

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2009)
  • M.G. Weber et al.

    Phylogeny, ecology, and the coupling of comparative and experimental approaches

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2012)
  • D.H. Janzen

    Coevolution of mutualism between ants and acacias in Central America

    Evolution

    (1966)
  • P.R. Ehrlich et al.

    Butterflies and plants: a study in coevolution

    Evolution

    (1964)
  • E. Decaestecker

    Host–parasite ‘Red Queen’ dynamics archived in pond sediment

    Nature

    (2007)
  • M.T. Horne

    Coevolution of Escherichia coli and bacteriophages in chemostat culture

    Science

    (1970)
  • J. Cowlishaw et al.

    Co-evolution of a virus–alga system

    Appl. Microbiol.

    (1975)
  • L. Chao

    Complex community in a simple habitat: experimental study with bacteria and phage

    Ecology

    (1977)
  • L. Van Valen

    A new evolutionary law

    Evol. Theory

    (1973)
  • G. Bell

    The Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution and Genetics of Sexuality

    (1982)
  • D.M. Wilkinson

    Running with the Red Queen: refelctions on ‘Sex versus non-sex versus parasite’

    Oikos

    (2000)
  • M.A. Brockhurst

    Sex, death and the Red Queen

    Science

    (2011)
  • R.D. Schulte

    Multiple reciprocal adaptations and rapid genetic change upon experimental coevolution of an animal host and its microbial parasite

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (2010)
  • S. Paterson

    Antagonistic coevolution accelerates molecular evolution

    Nature

    (2010)
  • A. Kashiwagi et al.

    Ongoing phenotypic and genomic changes in experimental coevolution of RNA bacteriophage Qβ and Escherichia coli

    PLoS Genet.

    (2011)
  • S. Gandon

    Host–parasite coevolution and patterns of adaptation across time and space

    J. Evol. Biol.

    (2008)
  • B. Koskella et al.

    Evidence for negative frequency-dependent selection during experimental coevolution of a freshwater snail and a sterilizing trematode

    Evolution

    (2009)
  • A. Fenton

    Two-step infection processes can lead to coevolution between functionally independent infection and resistance pathways

    Evolution

    (2012)
  • A.F. Agrawal et al.

    Modelling infection as a two-step process combining gene-for-gene and matching-allele genetics

    Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

    (2003)
  • A.R. Hall

    Host–parasite coevolutionary arms races give way to fluctuating selection

    Ecol. Lett.

    (2011)
  • S. Gandon

    Local adaptation and the geometry of host–parasite coevolution

    Ecol. Lett.

    (2002)
  • C. Pal

    Coevolution with viruses drives the evolution of bacterial mutation rates

    Nature

    (2007)
  • N. Kerstes

    Antagonistic experimental coevolution with a parasite increases host recombination frequency

    BMC Evol. Biol.

    (2012)
  • M. Greeff et al.

    Influence of co-evolution with a parasite, Nosema whitei, and population size on recombination rates and fitness in the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum

    Genetica

    (2010)
  • L.T. Morran

    Running with the Red Queen: host–parasite coevolution selects for biparental sex

    Science

    (2011)
  • S.E. Forde

    Coevolution drives temporal changes in fitness and diversity across environments in a bacteria–bacteriophage interaction

    Evolution

    (2008)
  • M.F. Marston

    Rapid diversification of coevolving marine Synechococcus and a virus

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (2012)
  • C. Bérénos

    Antagonistic coevolution with parasites maintains host genetic diversity: an experimental test

    Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

    (2011)
  • A. Buckling et al.

    The role of parasites in sympatric and allopatric host diversification

    Nature

    (2002)
  • A.D. Morgan

    The effect of migration on local adaptation in a coevolving host–parasite system

    Nature

    (2005)
  • S.E. Forde

    Adaptation varies through space and time in a coevolving host–parasitoid interaction

    Nature

    (2004)
  • T. Vogwill

    How does spatial dispersal network affect the evolution of parasite local adaptation?

    Evolution

    (2010)
  • J.D. Hoeksema et al.

    A meta-analysis of factors affecting local adaptation between interacting species

    Am. Nat.

    (2008)
  • M.A. Greischar et al.

    A synthesis of experimental work on parasite local adaptation

    Ecol. Lett.

    (2007)
  • J.N. Thompson

    The Coevolutionary Process

    (1994)
  • J.N. Thompson

    The Geographic Mosaic of Coevolution

    (2005)
  • L. Lopez Pascua

    Abiotic heterogeneity drives parasite local adaptation in coevolving bacteria and phages

    J. Evol. Biol.

    (2012)
  • M.A. Brockhurst

    The effect of spatial heterogeneity and parasites on the evolution of host diversity

    Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

    (2004)
  • T. Vogwill

    Coevolving parasites enhance the diversity-decreasing effect of dispersal

    Biol. Lett.

    (2011)
  • C. Bérénos

    Antagonistic coevolution accelerates the evolution of reproductive isolation in Tribolium castaneum

    Am. Nat.

    (2012)
  • V. Poullain

    The evolution of specificity in evolving and coevolving antagonistic interactions between a bacteria and its phage

    Evolution

    (2008)
  • P.D. Scanlan

    Genetic basis of infectivity evolution in a bacteriophage

    Mol. Ecol.

    (2011)
  • Cited by (157)

    • The evolutionary dynamics of hyperparasites

      2024, Journal of Theoretical Biology
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text