4.4 Article

Spatial eco-evolutionary feedback in plant-pathogen interactions

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLANT PATHOLOGY
卷 138, 期 3, 页码 667-677

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10658-013-0353-x

关键词

Coevolution; Eco-evolutionary dynamics; Eco-evolutionary feedback; Host-pathogen interactions; Metapopulation; Pathosystem

资金

  1. Academy of Finland [250444, 136393, 133499, 265761]
  2. European Research Council (PATHEVOL) [281517]
  3. Academy of Finland (AKA) [133499, 133499, 136393, 136393] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)
  4. European Research Council (ERC) [281517] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years the potential for evolutionary change to drive ecological dynamics, and vice versa, has been widely recognized. However, the convincing examples of eco-evolutionary dynamics mainly stem from highly artificial experimental systems, with conspicuously few examples contributed by field systems. While rarely considered in the eco-evolutionary literature, the gene-for-gene hypothesis inherently recognizes the tight link between evolutionary and ecological dynamics. The boom-and-bust dynamics of some agricultural pathogens are an extreme demonstration of this. In this perspective, we place plant-pathogen systems in a spatial eco-evolutionary framework, which recognizes that ecology and evolution are tightly linked, take place at the same time scale and are strongly influenced by spatial structure. Specifically, we: i) exemplify how the ecological process of dispersal modifies rapid local coevolutionary dynamics and thereby shapes spatial variation in resistance, infectivity, and local adaptation; and ii) illustrate how the outcome of coevolution (spatial distribution in resistance, infectivity and local adaptation) drives ecological metapopulation processes. Overall, we conclude that both agricultural and wild pathosystems provide a unique illustration of the high relevance of spatial eco-evolutionary feedback in understanding species interactions.

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