Timing and Number of Colonizations but Not Diversification Rates Affect Diversity Patterns in Hemosporidian Lineages on a Remote Oceanic Archipelago

Abstract

Parasite diversity on remote oceanic archipelagos is determined by the number and timing of colonizations and by in situ diversification rate. In this study, we compare intra-archipelago diversity of two hemosporidian parasite genera, Plasmodium and Leucocytozoon, infecting birds of the Mascarene archipelago. Despite the generally higher vagility of Plasmodium parasites, we report a diversity of Plasmodium cytochrome b haplotypes in the archipelago much lower than that of Leucocytozoon. Using phylogenetic data, we find that this difference in diversity is consistent with differences in the timing and number of colonizations, while rates of diversification do not vary significantly between the two genera. The prominence of immigration history in explaining current diversity patterns highlights the importance of historical contingencies in driving disparate biogeographic patterns in potentially harmful blood parasites infecting island birds. abstract: Parasite diversity on remote oceanic archipelagos is determined by the number and timing of colonizations and by in situ diversification rate. In this study, we compare intra-archipelago diversity of two hemosporidian parasite genera, Plasmodium and Leucocytozoon, infecting birds of the Mascarene archipelago. Despite the generally higher vagility of Plasmodium parasites, we report a diversity of Plasmodium cytochrome b haplotypes in the archipelago much lower than that of Leucocytozoon. Using phylogenetic data, we find that this difference in diversity is consistent with differences in the timing and number of colonizations, while rates of diversification do not vary significantly between the two genera. The prominence of immigration history in explaining current diversity patterns highlights the importance of historical contingencies in driving disparate biogeographic patterns in potentially harmful blood parasites infecting island birds.

Islands as model systems in ecology and evolution: prospects fifty years after MacArthur‐Wilson

“…Going a step further, with increasing availability of molecular phylogenetic data and advances in analytical interpretation, it is becoming possible to quantify immigration with ever-increasing accuracy (e.g. Ronquist & Sanmart ın 2011;Cornuault et al 2013). …”

“…Studies using dated phylogenies have variably supported both explanations (e.g. Rabosky et al 2007;Cornuault et al 2013). A second step involves considering alternative explanations for diversity dynamics such as diversity-dependence and bounded diversity, equilibrium dynamics and periods of diversity decline (Morlon 2014, and references therein).…”

The effects of island ontogeny on species diversity and phylogeny

“…In the past decade, molecular phylogenies of insular taxa [19,20] have become increasingly common and the full extent of such data to inform us about the processes governing island biogeography is just starting to be explored [21,22]. A densely sampled time-calibrated molecular phylogeny of the populations/species on an island and their mainland counterparts has the potential to be informative about (i) whether an endemic species was likely to have arisen cladogenetically or anagenetically [23,24], (ii) the timing and rate of colonizations and subsequent migrations [25,26] and (iii) change in rates of insular diversification over time or with diversity [27]. One of the most sophisticated uses of phylogenetic information in island biogeography to date is Rabosky & Glor's [21] application of birth-death models to the phylogenetic branching times of Anolis lizards on Caribbean islands.…”

Evolutionary priority effects in New Zealand alpine plants across environmental gradients

“…Clearly, a main reason for the lack of relevant work is the difficulty in conducting manipulative experiments over the many generations required (but see Fukami et al, 2007;Knope et al, 2012). Modern advances in phylogenetic analysis (Cavender-Bares et al, 2009) and molecular dating (Kumar, 2005) now provide the tools necessary to reconstruct, with increasing confidence, the order of successful species arrival over evolutionary time and to investigate evolutionary priority effects (Gehrke & Linder, 2011;Cornuault et al, 2013). Losos et al, 1998;Gillespie, 2004;Silvertown, 2004;Swenson, 2011;Patiño et al, 2013;Richardson et al, 2014).…”