Studies in speciation genomics have revealed that gene flow is quite common, and that despite this, species can maintain their distinct environmental adaptations. Although researchers are still elucidating the genomic mechanisms by which species maintain their adaptations in the face of gene flow, this often appears to involve few diverged genomic regions in otherwise largely undifferentiated genomes. In this preprint [1], Riquet and colleagues investigate the genetic structuring and patterns of parallel evolution in the long-snouted seahorse.
Before investigating specific SNPs plausibly associated with adaptation, the authors first describe genome-wide population structure in the long-snouted seahorse. This species is split into five phenotypically similar, but genetically distinct populations. Two populations reside in the Atlantic Ocean and are geographically structured with one north of the Iberian peninsula and the other around the Iberian peninsula. Two other populations are found in the Mediterranean Sea and are structured by the environment as they correspond to marine and lagoon environments. The genetic clustering of lagoon populations in the Mediterranean, despite the substantial geographic distance between them is quite impressive, and worthy of further study. Finally, a fifth population resides in a lagoon-like habitat in the Black Sea.
The authors then investigate patterns of extreme genomic differentiation among populations, and uncover a remarkable pattern of parallel differentiation in these populations. In an outlier scan, Riquet and colleagues find numerous SNPs in one genomic region that separates northern and southern Atlantic populations. Quiet surprisingly, this same genomic region appears to differentiate populations living in marine and lagoon habitats in the Mediterranean. The idea that parallel patterns of genomic differentiation may underlie adaptation to differing environmental scenarios has not yet received much attention. This paper should change that. This paper is particularity impressive in that the authors uncovered this intriguing pattern with under three hundred SNPs. Future genome scale studies will uncover the genomic basis behind this unusual case of parallelism.

References

[1] Riquet, F., Liautard-Haag, C., Woodall, L., Bouza, C., Louisy, P., Hamer, B., Otero-Ferrer, F., Aublanc, P., Béduneau, V., Briard, O., El Ayari, T., Hochscheid, S. Belkhir, K., Arnaud-Haond, S., Gagnaire, P.-A., Bierne, N. (2018). Parallel pattern of differentiation at a genomic island shared between clinal and mosaic hybrid zones in a complex of cryptic seahorse lineages. bioRxiv, 161786, ver. 4 recommended and peer-reviewed by PCI Evol Biol. doi: 10.1101/161786

Periodical cicadas are a very prominent insect group in North America that are known for their large size, good looks, and loud sounds. However, they are probably known best to evolutionary ecologists because of their long juvenile periods of 13 or 17 years (prime numbers!), which they spend in the ground. Multiple related species living in the same area are often coordinated in emerging as adults during the same year, thereby presumably swamping any predators specialized on eating them.
Life history differences between the 13yr and 17yr cicadas are a particular focus of interest. For example, as it takes time to grow large, one would expect 17yr cicadas to be larger than 13yr cicadas on average. Koyama et al. [1] investigate geographic body size clines for 7 species of periodical cicadas in eastern North America, whose phylogenetic relationships are resolved, in a life history context, using an impressively large number of populations (Fig. 1 of [1]). The authors report generally female-biased sexual body size dimorphism (SSD), and (however not for all species) a positive relationship of body size with habitat annual mean temperature taken from weather data and a negative correlation with latitude (Fig. 3 of [1]). The latter is consistent with a converse Bergmann cline. Crucially, body size of two at least partly sympatric 13y & 17y sister species pairs did not differ (by much), contrary to expectation because the 17y species have more time to grow larger. 13y cicadas must therefore generally grow faster (or 17y cicadas slower) to in the end acquire the same (optimal?) body size. The phylogenetically oldest 13y cicada species, however, is larger, suggesting that selection for large (optimal?) body size has relaxed over evolutionary time, for unknown reasons (about which the authors speculate). A mechanistic explanation for this phenomenon is suggested based on the hypothesis that 17y cicadas simply arrest or slow down growth early during their juvenile stage to delay emergence for 4 further years (Fig. 2 of [1]).
We think this is an impressive data set, and the life history question addressed in this prominent insect taxon should appeal to readers generally interested in whole-organism evolution despite being largely descriptive.

Reference

[1] Koyama T, Ito H, Kakishima S, Yoshimura J, Cooley JR, Simon C, Sota T. 2015. Geographic body size variation in the periodical cicadas Magicicada: implications for life cycle divergence and local adaptation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 28:1270-1277. doi: 10.1111/jeb.12653

It is well known that the rearing environment has strong effects on life history and fitness traits of organisms. Microbes are part of every environment and as such likely contribute to such environmental effects. Gut bacteria are a special type of microbe that most animals harbor, and as such they are part of most animals’ environment. Such microbial symbionts therefore likely contribute to local adaptation [1]. The main question underlying the laboratory study by Guilhot et al. [2] was: How much do particular gut bacteria affect the organismal phenotype, in terms of life history and larval foraging traits, of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, a common laboratory model species in biology?
To investigate the above question, the authors isolated 4 taxa of bacteria from the gut of a (randomly picked) Drosophila melanogaster lab strain, and subsequently let Drosophila melanogaster eggs and larvae (stemming from their own, different lab strain) develop both in the typical artificial laboratory medium as well as in grapes, a natural “new” habitat for Drosophila larvae, inoculated with theses bacteria, singly and in combination, also including a bacteria-free control. By investigating various relevant developmental and size traits, the authors found that adding particularly Enterobacteria had some visible effects on several traits, both upward (indicting improvement) and downward (being detrimental) (with three other types of bacteria showing only minor or even no effects). In general, the grape medium reduced performance relative to the standard lab medium. Strongest interactive effects occurred for development time and body size, together making up growth plasticity [3], with lesser such effects on some related behavioral (feeding) traits (Figs. 2,3).
The study premise is interesting, its general objectives are clearly laid out, and the practical work was conducted correctly as far as I can evaluate. The study remains largely descriptive in that no particular a priori hypotheses or predictions in relation to the specific bacteria isolated were formulated, not least because the bacteria were necessarily somewhat arbitrarily chosen and there were apparently no prior studies from which to derive concrete predictions. Overall, the results of this study should be of interest to the community of evolutionary ecologists, especially those working on nutritional and microbiome effects on animal life histories. I consider this work to be primarily ecological, with limited evolutionary content (e.g. no genetics) though some evolutionary implications, as mentioned in the paper’s Conclusions. So this paper would best fit in a microbial or physiological ecology outlet/journal.
The inclusion of a natural medium (grapes) must be commended because this permits inferences and conclusions for at least one natural environment, whereas inferences drawn from laboratory studies in the artificial medium that most Drosophila researchers seem to use are typically limited. Unsurprisingly perhaps, the study showed that Drosophila melanogaster fared generally better in the artificial than the chosen natural medium (grape). Crucially, however, the bacterial symbionts modified both media differentially. Although common bacterial taxa were chosen, the particular bacteria isolated and used remain arbitrary, as there are many. I note that the main and strongest interactive effects between medium and bacterial type are apparent for the Enterobacteria, and they probably also strongly, if not exclusively, mediate the overall effect of the bacterial mixture.
While these specific data are novel, they are not very surprising. If we grow animals in different environments we can expect some detectable effects of these environments, including the bacterial (microbiome) environment, on the hosts life history. The standard and predicted [4] life history response of Drosophila melanogaster (but not all insects [3]) facing stressful nutritional environments, as apparently created by the Enterobacteria, is to extend development but come out smaller in the end. This is what happened here for the laboratory medium ([2]: Fig. 5). The biological interpretation is that individuals have more trouble ingesting and/or digesting the nutrients available (thus prolonging their foraging period and development), yet cannot convert the nutrients effectively into body size increments (hence emerging smaller). This is what the authors here refer to as developmental plasticity, which is ultimately nutritionally mediated. However, interestingly, a signal in the opposite direction was indicated for the bacterial mixture in the grape medium (flies emerging larger after accelerated development: Fig. 5), suggesting some positive effects on growth rate of the natural medium, perhaps related to grapes being a limited resource that needs to be escaped quickly [3]? The reversal of sexual size dimorphism across bacterial treatments in the grape environment detectable in Fig. 4 is interesting, too, though I don’t understand why this happens, and this is not discussed.
In general, more encompassing and increased questions in this context to be researched in the future could be: 1) are these effects predictable (not (yet) at this point, or so it seems); and 2) how strong are these environmental bacterial effects relative to other, more standard effects (e.g. relative to genetic variation, population variation, etc., or relative to other types of environmental effects like, say, temperature)? (3) It could further be asked why not natural but laboratory populations of Drosophila were used for this experiment, if the aim was to draw inferences for the wild situation. (4) Although Genotype x Environment effects are invoked in the Discussion, they were not tested here, lacking genetically different Drosophila families or populations. From an evolutionary standpoint, I consider this the greatest weakness of the study. I was also not too thrilled by the particular statistical analyses employed, though this ultimately does not negate the results. Nevertheless, this work is a good start in this huge field investigating the microbiome. In conclusion, I can recommend this paper after review by PCI Evol Biol.

References

[1] Kawecki, T. J. and Ebert, D. (2004) Conceptual issues in local adaptation. Ecology Letters 7: 1225-1241. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00684.x
[2] Guilhot, R., Rombaut, A., Xuéreb, A., Howell, K. and Fellous, S. (2019). Environmental specificity in Drosophila-bacteria symbiosis affects host developmental plasticity. BioRxiv, 717702, v3 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Evolutionary Biology. doi: 10.1101/717702
[3] Blanckenhorn, W.U. (1999) Different growth responses to temperature and resource limitation in three fly species with similar life histories. Evolutionary Ecology 13: 395-409. doi: 10.1023/A:1006741222586
[4] Stearns, S. C. and Koella, J. (1986) The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in life history traits: predictions of reaction norms for age and size at maturity. Evolution 40: 893-914. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1986.tb00560.x

The tragic 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak that resulted in more than 28,000 cases and 11,000 deaths in West Africa [1] has been a surprise to the scientific community. Before 2013, the Ebola virus (EBOV) was known to produce recurrent outbreaks in remote villages near tropical rainforests in Central Africa, never exceeding a few hundred cases with very high virulence. Both EBOV’s ability to circulate for several months in large urban human populations and its important mutation rate suggest that EBOV’s virulence could evolve and to some extent adapt to human hosts [2]. Up to now, the high virulence of EBOV in humans was generally thought to be maladaptive, the virus being adapted to circulating in wild animal populations (e.g. fruit bats [3]). As a logical consequence, EBOV virulence could be expected to decrease during long epidemics in humans. The present paper by Sofonea et al. [4] challenges this view and explores how, given EBOV’s life cycle and known epidemiological parameters, virulence is expected to evolve in the human host during long epidemics. The main finding of the paper is that there is no chance that EBOV’s virulence decreases in the short and long terms. The main underlying mechanism is that EBOV is also transmitted by dead bodies, which limits the cost of virulence. In itself the idea that selection should select for higher virulence in diseases that are also transmitted after host death will sound intuitive for most evolutionary epidemiologists. The accomplishment of the paper is to make a very strong case that the parameter range where virulence could decrease is very small. The paper further provides scientifically grounded arguments in favor of the safe management of corpses. Safe burial of corpses is culturally difficult to impose. The present paper shows that in addition to instantaneously decreasing the spread of the virus, safe burial may limit virulence increase in the short term and favor of less virulent strains in the long term. Altogether these results make a timely and important contribution to the knowledge and understanding of EBOV.

References

[1] World Health Organization. 2016. WHO: Ebola situation report - 10 June 2016.

[2] Kupferschmidt K. 2014. Imagining Ebola’s next move. Science 346: 151–152. doi: 10.1126/science.346.6206.151

[3] Leroy EM, Kumulungui B, Pourrut X, Rouquet P, Hassanin A, Yaba P, Délicat A, Paweska, Gonzalez JP and Swanepoel R. 2005. Fruit bats as reservoirs of Ebola virus. Nature 438: 575–576. doi: 10.1038/438575a

[4] Sofonea MT, Aldakak L, Boullosa LFVV and Alizon S. 2017. Can Ebola Virus evolve to be less virulent in humans? bioRxiv 108589, ver. 3 of 19th May 2017; doi: 10.1101/108589

Interspecific matings are by definition rare events in nature, but when they occur they can be very important, and not only because they might condition gene flow between species. Even when such matings have no genetic consequence, for instance if they do not yield any fertile hybrid offspring, they can still have an impact on the population dynamics of the species involved [1]. Such atypical pairings between heterospecific partners are usually regarded as detrimental or undesired; as they interfere with the occurrence or success of intraspecific matings, they are expected to cause a decline in absolute fitness.
The story is not always so simple however, and it might all depend on the timing of events and on the identity of the partners. Using the herbivorous mite Tetranychus urticae as a model, Clemente et al. [2] experimentally arranged matings with two other Tetranychus species that commonly share the same host plants as T. urticae. They carefully controlled the history of events: heterospecific matings could occur just before, just after, 24h before, or 24h after, a conspecific mating. Interestingly, the oviposition rate (total fecundity) of females was increased when mating with a heterospecific individual. This suggests that heterospecic sperm can stimulate oogenesis just as conspecific sperm does. Such a positive effect was observed for matings involving T. ludeni females and T. urticae males, but a negative effect is found in the interaction with T. evansi. Sex-ratio (fertilization success in those species) could also be impacted but, unlike fertilization, this occurred when the mating events were distant in time. This is is at odds with what is observed in conspecific matings, where sperm displacement occurs only if mating events are temporally close. Overall, the effects of heterospecific mating were quite variable and it is challenging to predict a single, general, effect of interspecific matings. The net effect will likely be context-dependent, depending on the relative frequency of the difference mating sequences and on how fecundity and sex-ratio contribute to overall fitness, both aspect strongly influenced by the population dynamics and structure.

References

[1] Gröning J. & Hochkirch A. 2008. Reproductive interference between animal species. The Quarterly Review of Biology 83: 257-282. doi: 10.1086/590510

[2] Clemente SH, Santos I, Ponce AR, Rodrigues LR, Varela SAM & Magalhaes S. 2017 Despite reproductive interference, the net outcome of reproductive interactions among spider mite species is not necessarily costly. bioRxiv 113274, ver. 4 of the 30th of June 2017. doi: 10.1101/113274