2013
DOI: 10.1111/nph.12150
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cospeciation vs host‐shift speciation: methods for testing, evidence from natural associations and relation to coevolution

Abstract: 347I.348II.349III.349IV.355V.378VI.381381References381Glossary379 Summary Hosts and their symbionts are involved in intimate physiological and ecological interactions. The impact of these interactions on the evolution of each partner depends on the time‐scale considered. Short‐term dynamics – ‘coevolution’ in the narrow sense – has been reviewed elsewhere. We focus here on the long‐term evolutionary dynamics of cospeciation and speciation following host shifts. Whether hosts and their symbionts speciate in p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

14
472
1
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 366 publications
(496 citation statements)
references
References 179 publications
14
472
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Mapping traits of the mutualists and non-mutualist relatives on time-calibrated phylogenies has proved a powerful approach to unveil the temporal and geographical origin of mutualisms. A finding of co-phylogenetic studies of mutualisms is that co-speciation is rare (reviewed in [4]) and restricted to a few symbioses, especially those with vertical transmission, such as Buchnera bacterial endosymbionts and aphids [5][6][7]. Co-speciation in mutualistic partnerships that do not involve vertical transmission may exist in some obligate systems-for instance figs and their wasp pollinators as suggested by matching divergence times, although occasional wasp switches to other figs have been documented [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mapping traits of the mutualists and non-mutualist relatives on time-calibrated phylogenies has proved a powerful approach to unveil the temporal and geographical origin of mutualisms. A finding of co-phylogenetic studies of mutualisms is that co-speciation is rare (reviewed in [4]) and restricted to a few symbioses, especially those with vertical transmission, such as Buchnera bacterial endosymbionts and aphids [5][6][7]. Co-speciation in mutualistic partnerships that do not involve vertical transmission may exist in some obligate systems-for instance figs and their wasp pollinators as suggested by matching divergence times, although occasional wasp switches to other figs have been documented [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Once the restrictions of host plant use are relaxed, the temporal and spatial distributions of host plants and insects may become major determinants of host shifting (de Vienne et al., 2013). Specifically, the timing of the overlapping distribution of E. binotata species might be a key factor in host‐shifting events.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parasite diversification cannot be explained based on the process of strict cospeciation, since this would result in the extreme specialization of parasites and a narrow host spectrum (de Vienne et al 2013). If cospeciation was the driving force of parasite diversification, one would expect that all mammals in a clade would be infected by parasites that are phylogenetically related, which is seldom the case (Light & Hafner 2008).…”
Section: Historical Associations: Does Cospeciation Explain the Distrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a consequence, these parasites would be a proxy of the phenotype of the host; thus the reconstruction of the relationships of these hosts necessitated the inclusion of parasites as an additional character (Fahrenholz 1913, Kellogg 1913. In spite of its circular reasoning (Klassen 1992, de Vienne et al 2013, and the fact that most parasites are not permanent in or on their hosts, these premises have prevailed in the scientific literature up to the current time. The expectation of maximum cospeciation is not congruent with the restricted geographic distribution of several parasites.…”
Section: Historical Associations: Does Cospeciation Explain the Distrmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation