4.4 Article

Patterns of Host-Parasite Adaptation in Three Populations of Monarch Butterflies Infected with a Naturally Occurring Protozoan Disease: Virulence, Resistance, and Tolerance

期刊

AMERICAN NATURALIST
卷 182, 期 6, 页码 E235-E248

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/673442

关键词

local adaptation; negative frequency-dependent selection; arms race dynamics; Ophryocystis elektroscirrha; resistance; tolerance

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DEB-1019746, DEB-1257160]
  2. Division Of Environmental Biology
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1019746] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many studies have used host-parasite systems to study local adaptation, but few of these studies have found unequivocal evidence for adaptation. One potential reason is that most studies have focused on limited measures of host and parasite fitness that are generally assumed to be under negative frequency-dependent selection. We have used reciprocal cross-infection experiments to test for local adaptation in Hawaiian, south Floridian, and eastern North American populations of monarch butterflies and their protozoan parasites. Sympatric host-parasite combinations did not result in greater host or parasite fitness, as would be expected under coevolutionary dynamics driven by negative frequency-dependent selection. Instead, we found that Hawaiian hosts were more resistant and carried more infective and virulent parasites, which is consistent with theoretical predictions for virulence evolution and coevolutionary arms race dynamics. We also found that Hawaiian hosts were more tolerant, particularly of Hawaiian parasites, indicating that increased resistance does not preclude increased tolerance within a population and that hosts may be more tolerant of local parasites. We did not find a similar pattern in the south Floridian or eastern populations, possibly because host-parasite adaptation occurs within the context of a greater ecological community.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据