Genetic conflict with a parasitic nematode disrupts the legume-rhizobia mutualism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Genetic variation for partner quality in mutualisms is an evolutionary paradox. One possible resolution to this puzzle is that there is a tradeoff between partner quality and other fitness-related traits. Here, we tested whether a susceptibility to parasitism is one such tradeoff in the mutualism between legumes and nitrogen-fixing bacteria (rhizobia). We performed two greenhouse experiments with the legume Medicago truncatula . In the first, we inoculated each plant with the rhizobia Ensifer meliloti and with one of 40 genotypes of the parasitic root-knot nematode Meloidogyne hapla . In the second experiment, we inoculated all plants with rhizobia and half of the plants with a genetically variable population of nematodes. Using the number of nematode galls as a proxy for infection severity, we found that plant genotypes differed in susceptibility to nematode infection, and nematode genotypes differed in infectivity. Second, we showed that there was a genetic correlation between the number of mutualistic structures formed by rhizobia (nodules) and the number of parasitic structures formed by nematodes (galls). Finally, we found that nematodes disrupt the rhizobia mutualism: nematode-infected plants formed fewer nodules and had less nodule biomass than uninfected plants. Our results demonstrate that there is genetic conflict between attracting rhizobia and repelling nematodes in Medicago . If genetic conflict with parasitism is a general feature of mutualism, it could account for the maintenance of genetic variation in partner quality and influence the evolutionary dynamics of positive species interactions. Impact summary Cooperative species interactions, known as mutualisms, are vital for organisms from plants to humans. For example, beneficial microbes in the human gut are a necessary component of digestive health. However, parasites often infect their hosts via mechanisms that are extraordinarily similar to those used by mutualists, which may create a tradeoff between attracting mutualists and resisting parasites. In this study, we investigated whether this tradeoff exists, and how parasites impact mutualism function in the barrelclover Medicago truncatula , a close relative of alfalfa. Legumes like Medicago depend on nitrogen provided by mutualistic bacteria (rhizobia) to grow, but they are also infected by parasitic worms called nematodes, which steal plant nutrients. Both microorganisms live in unique structures (nodules and galls) on plant roots. We showed that the benefits of mutualism and the costs of parasitism are predicted by the number of mutualistic structures (nodules) and the number of parasitic structures (galls), respectively. Second, we found that there is a genetic tradeoff between attracting mutualists and repelling parasites in Medicago truncatula : plant genotypes that formed more rhizobia nodules also formed more nematode galls. Finally, we found that nematodes disrupt the rhizobia mutualism. Nematode-infected plants formed fewer rhizobia nodules and less total nodule biomass than uninfected plants. Our research addresses an enduring evolutionary puzzle: why is there so much variation in the benefits provided by mutualists when natural selection should weed out low-quality partners? Tradeoffs between benefits provided by mutualists and their susceptibility to parasites could resolve this paradox.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".