MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801682127 · doi:10.1111/brv.12417

The role of defensive symbionts in host–parasite coevolution

2018· review· en· W2801682127 on OpenAlex
Christoph Vorburger, Steve J. Perlman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungUniversity of VictoriaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCoevolutionHost (biology)Parasite hostingBiologyEvolutionary biologySymbiosisEcologyGeneticsBacteriaComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the coevolution of hosts and parasites is a long-standing goal of evolutionary biology. There is a well-developed theoretical framework to describe the evolution of host-parasite interactions under the assumption of direct, two-species interactions, which can result in arms race dynamics or sustained genotype fluctuations driven by negative frequency dependence (Red Queen dynamics). However, many hosts rely on symbionts for defence against parasites. Whilst the ubiquity of defensive symbionts and their potential importance for disease control are increasingly recognized, there is still a gap in our understanding of how symbionts mediate or possibly take part in host-parasite coevolution. Herein we address this question by synthesizing information already available from theoretical and empirical studies. First, we briefly introduce current hypotheses on how defensive mutualisms evolved from more parasitic relationships and highlight exciting new experimental evidence showing that this can occur very rapidly. We go on to show that defensive symbionts influence virtually all important determinants of coevolutionary dynamics, namely the variation in host resistance available to selection by parasites, the specificity of host resistance, and the trade-off structure between host resistance and other components of fitness. In light of these findings, we turn to the limited theory and experiments available for such three-species interactions to assess the role of defensive symbionts in host-parasite coevolution. Specifically, we discuss under which conditions the defensive symbiont may take over from the host the reciprocal adaptation with parasites and undergo its own selection dynamics, thereby altering or relaxing selection on the hosts' own immune defences. Finally, we address potential effects of defensive symbionts on the evolution of parasite virulence. This is an important problem for which there is no single, clear-cut prediction. The selection on parasite virulence resulting from the presence of defensive symbionts in their hosts will depend on the underlying mechanism of defence. We identify the evolutionary predictions for different functional categories of symbiont-conferred resistance and we evaluate the empirical literature for supporting evidence. We end this review with outstanding questions and promising avenues for future research to improve our understanding of symbiont-mediated coevolution between hosts and parasites.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it