Testing cospeciation through large-scale cophylogenetic studies

Current Opinion in Insect Science

Volumn 18, Issue , 2016, Pages 53-59

  Cruaud, Astrid ^a   Rasplus, Jean Yves ^a  

^a CENTRE DE BIOLOGIE ET DE GESTION DES POPULATIONS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; CLASSIFICATION; HOST PARASITE INTERACTION; HOST RANGE; INSECT; PHYLOGENY; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANIMALS; HOST SPECIFICITY; HOST-PARASITE INTERACTIONS; INSECTA; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 84992649014     PISSN: 22145745     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cois.2016.10.004     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. 1 Wernegreen, J.J., Genome evolution in bacterial endosymbionts of insects. Nat Rev Genet 3 (2002), 850–861.
2. 2 Jousselin, E., Desdevises, Y., Coeur d'Acier, A., Fine-scale cospeciation between Brachycaudus and Buchnera aphidicola: bacterial genome helps define species and evolutionary relationships in aphids. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 276 (2009), 187–196.
3. 3 Takiya, D.M., Tran, P.L., Dietrich, C.H., Moran, N.A., Co-cladogenesis spanning three phyla: leafhoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) and their dual bacterial symbionts. Mol Ecol 15 (2006), 4175–4191.
4. 4 Hosokawa, T., Kikuchi, Y., Nikoh, N., Shimada, M., Fukatsu, T., Strict host-symbiont cospeciation and reductive genome evolution in insect gut bacteria. PLoS Biol 4 (2006), 1841–1851.
5. 5 Sabree, Z.L., Moran, N.A., Host-specific assemblages typify gut microbial communities of related insect species. SpringerPlus, 3, 2014, 138.
6. 6 Lo, N., Bandi, C., Watanabe, H., Nalepa, C., Beninati, T., Evidence for cocladogenesis between diverse dictyopteran lineages and their intracellular endosymbionts. Mol Biol Evol 20 (2003), 907–913.
7. 7• Merrill, R.M., Dasmahapatra, K.K., Davey, J.W., Dell'Aglio, D.D., Hanly, J.J., Huber, B., Jiggins, C.D., Joron, M., Kozak, K.M., Llaurens, V., et al. The diversification of Heliconius butterflies: what have we learned in 150 years?. J Evol Biol 28 (2015), 1417–1438 A must read for an overview of our current knowledge on this intriguing system.
8. 8 Hoyal Cuthill, J., Charleston, M., Phylogenetic codivergence supports coevolution of mimetic Heliconius butterflies. PLoS ONE, 7, 2012, e36464.
9. 9 Bronstein, J.L., Bronstein, J.L., (eds.) Mutualism, 2015, Oxford University Press, USA.
10. 10 Althoff, D.M., Segraves, K.A., Smith, C.I., Leebens-Mack, J., Pellmyr, O., Geographic isolation trumps coevolution as a driver of yucca and yucca moth diversification. Mol Phylogenet Evol 62 (2012), 898–906.
11. 11 Kawakita, A., Takimura, A., Terachi, T., Sota, T., Kato, M., Cospeciation analysis of an obligate pollination mutualism: have Glochidion trees (Euphorbiaceae) and pollinating Epicephala moths (Gracillariidae) diversified in parallel?. Evolution 58 (2004), 2201–2214.
12. 12 Cruaud, A., Rønsted, N., Chantarasuwan, B., Chou, L.S., Clement, W., Couloux, A., Cousins, B., Forest, F., Genson, G., Harrison, R.D., et al. An extreme case of plant-insect co-diversification: figs and fig-pollinating wasps. Syst Biol 61 (2012), 1029–1047.
13. 13 Light, J.E., Hafner, M.S., Codivergence in heteromyid rodents (Rodentia: Heteromyidae) and their sucking lice of the genus Fahrenholzia (Phthiraptera: Anoplura). Syst Biol 57 (2008), 449–465.
14. 14 Page, R.D.M., Cruickshank, R.H., Dickens, M., Furness, R.W., Kennedy, M., Palma, R.L., Smith, V.S., Phylogeny of “Philoceanus complex” seabird lice (Phthiraptera: Ischnocera) inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol 30 (2004), 633–652.
15. 15 Clayton, D., Johnson, K., Linking coevolutionary history to ecological process: doves and lice. Evolution 57 (2003), 2335–2341.
16. 16 Deng, J., Yu, F., Li, H.B., Gebiola, M., Desdevises, Y., Wu, S.A., Zhang, Y.Z., Cophylogenetic relationships between Anicetus parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) and their scale insect hosts (Hemiptera: Coccidae). BMC Evol Biol, 13, 2013, 275.
17. 17 Wilson, J.S., Forister, M.L., Dyer, L.A., O'connor, J.M., Burls, K., Feldman, C.R., Jaramillo, M.A., Miller, J.S., Rodríguez-Castañeda, G., Tepe, E.J., et al. Host conservatism, host shifts and diversification across three trophic levels in two Neotropical forests. J Evol Biol 25 (2012), 532–546.
18. 18• de Vienne, D.M., Refrégier, G., López-Villavicencio, M., Tellier, A., Hood, M.E., Giraud, T., Cospeciation vs host-shift speciation: methods for testing, evidence from natural associations and relation to coevolution. New Phytol 198 (2013), 347–385 A relatively recent review of cophylogenetic methods and available data concerning long-term host and parasite coevolutionary dynamics. Authors conclude that speciation following host shifts is at least as likely as cospeciation in many cases. Authors argue for a careful interpretation of results, suggest that event-based methods overestimate the occurrence of cospeciation, underline the fact that coevolution does not imply widespread cospeciation and that temporal coincidence of speciation events should be evaluated to assess cospeciation.
19. 19 Filipiak, A., Zając, K., Kübler, D., Kramarz, P., Coevolution of host-parasite associations and methods for studying their cophylogeny. ISJ 13 (2016), 56–65.
20. 20 Charleston, N.A., Perkins, S.L., Traversing the tangle: algorithms and applications for cophylogenetic studies. J Biomed Inform 39 (2006), 62–71.
21. 21• Drinkwater, B., Charleston, M.A., Towards sub-quadratic time and space complexity solutions for the dated tree reconciliation problem. Algorithms Mol Biol, 11, 2016, 15 Introduction may help to better understand the purposes of cophylogenetics and challenges the field faced/faces (but see also older papers).
22. 22 Ronquist, F., Reconstructing the history of host-parasite associations using generalised parsimony. Cladistics 11 (1995), 73–89.
23. 23 Conow, C., Fielder, D., Ovadia, Y., Libeskind-Hadas, R., Jane: a new tool for the cophylogeny reconstruction problem. Algorithms Mol Biol, 5, 2010, 16.
24. 24 Baudet, C., Donati, B., Sinaimeri, B., Crescenzi, P., Gautier, C., Matias, C., Sagot, M.F., Cophylogeny reconstruction via an approximate bayesian computation. syu129. Syst Biol 64 (2015), 416–431.
25. 25 Doyon, J.P., Scornavacca, C., Gorbunov, K.Y., Szöllősi, G.J., Ranwez, V., Berry, V., An Efficient Algorithm for Gene/Species Trees Parsimonious Reconciliation With Losses, Duplications and Transfers. Comparative Genomics. 2010, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 93–108.
26. 26 Drinkwater, B., Qiao, A., Charleston, M.A., WiSPA: A New Approach for Dealing With Widespread Parasitism. 2016 arXiv:1603.09415.
27. 27 Desdevises, Y., Cophylogeny: insights from fish-parasite systems. Parassitologia 49 (2007), 125–128.
28. 28 Balbuena, J.A., Míguez-Lozano, R., Blasco-Costa, I., PACo: a novel procrustes application to cophylogenetic analysis. PLoS ONE, 8, 2013, e61048.
29. 29 Fahrenholz, H., Ectoparasiten und abstammungslehre. Zool Anz 41 (1913), 371–374.
30. 30• Althoff, D.M., Segraves, K.A., Johnson, M.T.J., Testing for coevolutionary diversification: linking pattern with process. Trends Ecol Evol 29 (2014), 82–89 The authors suggest that most studies have focused on elucidating macroevolutionary patterns rather than processes giving rise to such patterns and conclude that there is weak evidence that coevolution promotes diversification. Authors redefine and propose several approaches to test for coevolutionary diversification and argue that the role of coevolution in population divergence should be linked to patterns of speciation in coevolving groups to prove coevolutionary diversification.
31. 31 Suchan, T., Alvarez, N., Fifty years after Ehrlich and Raven, is there support for plant-insect coevolution as a major driver of species diversification?. Entomol Exp Appl 157 (2015), 98–112.
32. 32 de Vienne, D.M., Giraud, T., Shykoff, J.A., When can host shifts produce congruent host and parasite phylogenies? A simulation approach. J Evol Biol 20 (2007), 1428–1438.
33. 33 Jermy, T., Evolution of insect/host plant relationships. Am Nat 124 (1984), 609–630.
34. 34 Clayton, D.H., Bush, S.E., Johnson, K.P., Coevolution of Life on Hosts: Integrating Ecology and History. 2015, The University of Chicago Press, London.
35. 35 Gompert, Z., Forister, M.L., Fordyce, J.A., Nice, C.C., Widespread mito-nuclear discordance with evidence for introgressive hybridization and selective sweeps in Lycaeides. Mol Ecol 17 (2008), 5231–5244.
36. 36 Pereira, T.J., Baldwin, J.G., Contrasting evolutionary patterns of 28S and ITS rRNA genes reveal high intragenomic variation in Cephalenchus (Nematoda): implications for species delimitation. Mol Phylogenet Evol 98 (2016), 244–260.
37. 37• Lemmon, E.M., Lemmon, A.R., High-throughput genomic data in systematics and phylogenetics. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 44 (2013), 99–121 The authors propose a review of laboratory procedures for collection of high-throughput data for phylogenetic inference and expose challenges for the analysis of these data (especially locus selection and proper model choice).
38. 38 Schindel, D.M., du Plessis, P., Reap the benefits of the Nagoya protocol. Nature, 515, 2014, 37.
39. 39• Yang, Z., Rannala, B., Molecular phylogenetics: principles and practice. Nat Rev Genet 13 (2012), 303–314 This publication reviews the major methods of phylogenetic analysis (parsimony, distance, likelihood and Bayesian methods), discusses their strengths and weaknesses and provides guidance for their use.
40. 40• Kumar, S., Filipski, A.J., Battistuzzi, F.U., Pond, S.L.K., Tamura, K., Statistics and truth in phylogenomics. Mol Biol Evol 29 (2012), 457–472 The authors discuss the challenges researchers face regarding the interpretation of and reliance on statistical significance with ever larger data sets and warn against statistical overconfidence. They show how inferences can easily be misleading when the assumptions made by the methods/models used are violated. They argue in favour of developing improved methods, more sophisticated models, and identifying other sources of data that may supply different perspectives on the phylogeny.
41. 41 Boussau, B., Walton, Z., Delgado, J.A., Collantes, F., Beani, L., Stewart, I.J., Cameron, S.A., Whitfield, J.B., Johnston, J.S., Holland, P.W.H., et al. Strepsiptera, phylogenomics and the long branch attraction problem. PLoS ONE, 2014, 9.
42. 42 Rivera-Rivera, C.J., Montoya-Burgos, J.I., LS3: a method for improving phylogenomic inferences when evolutionary rates are heterogeneous among taxa. Mol Biol Evol 33 (2016), 1625–1634.
43. 43 Ho, S.Y., Duchêne, S., Molecular-clock methods for estimating evolutionary rates and timescales. Mol Ecol 23 (2014), 5947–5965.
44. 44• dos Reis, M., Donoghue, P.C.J., Yang, Z., Bayesian molecular clock dating of species divergences in the genomics era. Nat Rev Genet 17 (2016), 71–80 A historical review of dating methods.
45. 45 Kumar, S., Hedges, S.B., Advances in time estimation methods for molecular data. Mol Biol Evol 33 (2016), 863–869.
46. 46 Landis, M.J., Biogeographic dating of speciation times using paleogeographically informed processes. Syst Biol, 2016 Advance Access.
47. 47 Page, R.D., Clayton, D.H., Paterson, A.M., Lice and cospeciation: a response to Barker. Int J Parasitol 26 (1996), 213–218.
48. 48• Fujita, M.K., Leache, A.D., Burbrink, F.T., McGuire, J.A., Moritz, C., Coalescent-based species delimitation in an integrative taxonomy. Trends Ecol Evol 27 (2012), 480–488 The authors discuss coalescent-based species delimitation (power and limitations) and argue that it should be a component of integrative taxonomy.
49. 49 Janzen, D.H., When it is coevolution?. Evolution 34 (1980), 611–612.
50. 50 Charleston, M.A., Jungles: a new solution to the host/parasite phylogeny reconciliation problem. Math Biosci 149 (1998), 191–223.
51. 51 Cook, J.M., Rasplus, J.-Y., Mutualists with attitude: coevolving fig wasps and figs. Trends Ecol Evol 18 (2003), 241–248.
52. 52 Herre, E.A., Jander, K.C., Machado, C.A., Evolutionary ecology of figs and their associates: recent progress and outstanding puzzles. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39 (2008), 439–458.
53. 53 Rønsted, N., Weiblen, G., Clement, W.L., Zerega, N.J.C., Savolainen, V., Reconstructing the phylogeny of figs (Ficus, Moraceae) to reveal the history of the fig pollination mutualism. Symbiosis 45 (2008), 45–55.
54. 54 Cruaud, A., Jabbour-Zahab, R., Genson, G., Cruaud, C., Couloux, A., Kjellberg, F., van Noort, S., Rasplus, J.-Y., Laying the foundations for a new classification of Agaonidae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea), a multilocus phylogenetic approach. Cladistics 26 (2010), 359–387.