21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Multi-modal defences in aphids offer redundant protection and increased costs likely impeding a protective mutualism

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum, maintains extreme variation in resistance to its most common parasitoid wasp enemy, Aphidius ervi, which is sourced from two known mechanisms: protective bacterial symbionts, most commonly Hamiltonella defensa, or endogenously encoded defences. We have recently found that individual aphids may employ each defence individually, occasionally both defences together, or neither. In field populations, Hamiltonella-infected aphids are found at low to moderate frequencies and while less is known about the frequency of resistant genotypes, they show up less often than susceptible genotypes in field collections. To better understand these patterns, we sought to compare the strengths and costs of both types of defence, individually and together, in order to elucidate the selective pressures that maintain multi-modal defence mechanisms or that may favour one over the other. We experimentally infected five aphid genotypes (two lowly and three highly resistant), each with two symbiont strains, Hamiltonella-APSE8 (moderate protection) and Hamiltonella-APSE3 (high protection). This resulted in three sublines per genotype: uninfected, +APSE8 and +APSE3. Each of the 15 total sublines was first subjected to a parasitism assay to determine its resistance phenotype and in a second experiment, a subset was chosen to compare fitness (fecundity and survivorship) in the presence and absence of parasitism. In susceptible aphid genotypes, parasitized sublines infected with Hamiltonella generally showed increased protection with direct fitness benefits, but clear infection costs to fitness in the absence of parasitism. In resistant genotypes, Hamiltonella infection rarely conferred additional protection, often further reduced fecundity and survivorship when enemy challenged, and resulted in constitutive fitness costs in the absence of parasitism. We also identified strong aphid genotype × symbiont-strain interactions, such that the best defensive strategy against parasitoids varied for each aphid genotype; one performed best with no protective symbionts, the others with particular strains of Hamiltonella. This surprising variability in outcomes helps explain why Hamiltonella infection frequencies are often intermediate and do not strongly track parasitism frequencies in field populations. We also find that variation in endogenous traits, such as resistance, among host genotypes may offer redundancy and generally limit the invasion potential of mutualistic microbes in insects.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Facultative bacterial symbionts in aphids confer resistance to parasitic wasps.

          Symbiotic relationships between animals and microorganisms are common in nature, yet the factors controlling the abundance and distributions of symbionts are mostly unknown. Aphids have an obligate association with the bacterium Buchnera aphidicola (the primary symbiont) that has been shown to contribute directly to aphid fitness. In addition, aphids sometimes harbor other vertically transmitted bacteria (secondary symbionts), for which few benefits of infection have been previously documented. We carried out experiments to determine the consequences of these facultative symbioses in Acyrthosiphon pisum (the pea aphid) for vulnerability of the aphid host to a hymenopteran parasitoid, Aphidius ervi, a major natural enemy in field populations. Our results show that, in a controlled genetic background, infection confers resistance to parasitoid attack by causing high mortality of developing parasitoid larvae. Compared with uninfected controls, experimentally infected aphids were as likely to be attacked by ovipositing parasitoids but less likely to support parasitoid development. This strong interaction between a symbiotic bacterium and a host natural enemy provides a mechanism for the persistence and spread of symbiotic bacteria.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Variation in resistance to parasitism in aphids is due to symbionts not host genotype.

            Natural enemies are important ecological and evolutionary forces, and heritable variation in resistance to enemies is a prerequisite for adaptive responses of populations. Such variation in resistance has been previously documented for pea aphids (Acyrthosiphon pisum) attacked by the parasitoid wasp Aphidius ervi. Although the variation was presumed to reflect genotypic differences among the aphids, another potential source of resistance to A. ervi is infection by the facultative bacterial symbiont Hamiltonella defensa. Here, we explored whether variation among symbiont isolates underlies variation among A. pisum clones in resistance to A. ervi. Although maternally transmitted, H. defensa is sometimes horizontally transferred in nature and can be experimentally established in clonal aphid lineages. We established five H. defensa isolates in a common A. pisum genetic background. All of the five isolates tested, including one originating from another aphid species, conferred resistance. Furthermore, isolates varied in levels of resistance conferred, ranging from 19% to nearly 100% resistance. In contrast, a single H. defensa isolate established in five different aphid clones conferred similar levels of resistance; that is, host genotype did not influence resistance level. These results indicate that symbiont-mediated resistance to parasitism is a general phenomenon in A. pisum and that, at least for the isolates and genotypes considered, it is the symbiont isolate that determines the level of resistance, not aphid genotype or any interaction between isolate and genotype. Thus, acquisition of a heritable symbiont appears to be a major mode of adaptation to natural enemy pressure in these insects.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evolution of developmental strategies in parasitic hymenoptera.

              Parasitoid wasps have evolved a wide spectrum of developmental interactions with hosts. In this review we synthesize and interpret results from the phylogenetic, ecological, physiological, and molecular literature to identify factors that have influenced the evolution of parasitoid developmental strategies. We first discuss the origins and radiation of the parasitoid lifestyle in the Hymenoptera. We then summarize how parasitoid developmental strategies are affected by ecological interactions and assess the inventory of physiological and molecular traits parasitoids use to successfully exploit hosts. Last, we discuss how certain parasitoid virulence genes have evolved and how these changes potentially affect parasitoid-host interactions. The combination of phylogenetic data with comparative and functional genomics offers new avenues for understanding the evolution of biological diversity in this group of insects.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Animal Ecology
                J Anim Ecol
                Wiley
                00218790
                March 2018
                March 2018
                June 05 2017
                : 87
                : 2
                : 464-477
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Entomology; University of Georgia; Athens GA USA
                [2 ]Department of Evolutionary Ecology; Johannes Gutenberg University; Mainz Germany
                Article
                10.1111/1365-2656.12675
                28378393
                81442325-f021-4549-a3df-c0f4a55309e3
                © 2017

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#am

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article