Ocean warming is causing global coral bleaching events to increase in frequency, resulting in widespread coral mortality and disrupting the function of coral reef ecosystems. However, even during mass bleaching events, many corals resist bleaching despite exposure to abnormally high temperatures. While the physiological effects of
Mutualisms are often framed as ‘delicately balanced antagonisms’ (Bronstein, 1994), with the net fitness benefits to both partners potentially masking underlying conflicts of interest. How commonly symbionts evolve to ‘cheat’ their hosts and hosts evolve to ‘sanction’ or ‘control’ uncooperative symbionts is the subject of debate, especially in legume–rhizobium interactions (Frederickson, 2013; Kiers et al., 2003). This kind of antagonistic coevolution should result in either arms‐race dynamics characterized by repeated selective sweeps or fluctuating selection dynamics that leave signatures of balancing selection in host and symbiont genomes (Frederickson, 2013; Kortright et al., 2022; O'Brien et al., 2021). In a From the Cover article in this issue of Molecular Ecology, Epstein et al. (2022) combine GWAS and population genomic analyses to assess the evidence for positive or balancing selection consistent with ongoing, antagonistic coevolution between legumes and rhizobia. They found few genomic signatures of fitness conflicts between mutualistic partners, suggesting that legume and rhizobium fitness interests are largely aligned and symbiotic traits are mostly under stabilizing selection. In combination with other recent work (e.g. Batstone et al., 2020), the results of Epstein et al. (2022) indicate that there is little ongoing fitness conflict between legumes and rhizobia that shapes host and symbiont genomes in this system. It may be time to move beyond symbiont ‘cheating’ and host ‘control’ as the dominant paradigm for understanding how partners in mutualism coevolve.
Ocean warming is causing global coral bleaching events to increase in frequency, resulting in widespread coral mortality and disrupting the function of coral reef ecosystems. However, even during mass bleaching events, many corals resist bleaching despite exposure to abnormally high temperatures. While the physiological effects of bleaching have been well documented, the consequences of heat stress for bleaching resistant individuals are not well understood. In addition, much remains to be learned about how heat stress affects cellular level processes that may be overlooked at the organismal level, yet are crucial for coral performance in the short term and ecological success over the long term. Here we compared the physiological and cellular responses of bleaching resistant and bleaching susceptible corals throughout the 2019 marine heatwave in Hawaii, a repeat bleaching event that occurred four years after the previous regional event. Relative bleaching susceptibility within species was consistent between the two bleaching events, yet corals of both resistant and susceptible phenotypes exhibited pronounced metabolic depression during the heatwave. At the cellular level, bleaching susceptible corals had lower intracellular pH than bleaching resistant corals at the peak of bleaching for both symbiont-hosting and symbiont-free cells, indicating greater disruption of acid-base homeostasis in bleaching susceptible individuals. Notably, cells from both phenotypes were unable to compensate for experimentally induced cellular acidosis, indicating that acid-base regulation was significantly impaired at the cellular level even in bleaching resistant corals and in cells containing symbionts. Thermal disturbances may thus have substantial ecological consequences, as even small reallocations in energy budgets to maintain homeostasis during stress can negatively affect fitness. These results suggest concern is warranted for corals coping with ocean acidification alongside ocean warming, as the feedback between temperature stress and acid-base regulation may further exacerbate the physiological effects of climate change.
Mutualistic species vary in their level of partner specificity, which has important evolutionary, ecological, and management implications. Yet, the evolutionary mechanisms which underpin partner specificity are not fully understood. Most work on specialization focuses on the trade-off between generalism and specialism, where specialists receive more benefits from preferred partners at the expense of benefits from non-preferred partners, while generalists receive similar benefits from all partners. Because all mutualisms involve some degree of both cooperation and conflict between partners, we highlight that specialization to a mutualistic partner can be cooperative, increasing benefit to a focal species and a partner, or antagonistic, increasing resource extraction by a focal species from a partner. We devise an evolutionary game theoretic model to assess the evolutionary dynamics of cooperative specialization, antagonistic specialization, and generalism. Our model shows that cooperative specialization leads to bistability: stable equilibria with a specialist host and its preferred partner excluding all others. We also show that under cooperative specialization with spatial effects, generalists can thrive at the boundaries between differing specialist patches. Under antagonistic specialization, generalism is evolutionarily stable. We provide predictions for how a cooperation-antagonism continuum may determine the patterns of partner specificity that develop within mutualistic relationships.
Mutualistic species vary in their level of partner specificity, which has important evolutionary, ecological, and management implications. Yet, the evolutionary mechanisms which underpin partner specificity are not fully understood. Most work on specialization focuses on the trade-off between generalism and specialism, where specialists receive more benefits from preferred partners at the expense of benefits from non-preferred partners, while generalists receive similar benefits from all partners. Because all mutualisms involve some degree of both cooperation and conflict between partners, we highlight that specialization to a mutualistic partner can be cooperative, increasing benefit to a focal species and a partner, or antagonistic, increasing resource extraction by a focal species from a partner. We devise an evolutionary game theoretic model to assess the evolutionary dynamics of cooperative specialization, antagonistic specialization, and generalism. Our model shows that cooperative specialization leads to bistability: stable equilibria with a specialist host and its preferred partner excluding all others. We also show that under cooperative specialization with spatial effects, generalists can thrive at the boundaries between differing specialist patches. Under antagonistic specialization, generalism is evolutionarily stable. We provide predictions for how a cooperation-antagonism continuum may determine the patterns of partner specificity that develop within mutualistic relationships.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.