Letter | Published:

Geographic structure and dynamics of coevolutionary selection

Naturevolume 417pages735738 (2002) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

Coevolution of species is one of the major processes organizing the Earth's biodiversity. Recent coevolutionary theory has indicated that the geographic structure of species has the potential to impose powerful and continuing effects on coevolutionary dynamics, if that structure creates selection mosaics and coevolutionary hotspots across landscapes1,2,3,4,5,6,7. Here we confirm that current coevolutionary selection in interspecific interactions can be highly divergent across both narrow and broad geographic scales, thereby fuelling continuing coevolution of taxa. Study of a widespread plant–insect interaction across a broad range of habitats for several years showed that an insect functioning both as a pollinator and a floral parasite can be strongly mutualistic in some habitats but commensal or antagonistic in neighbouring habitats. The results for one of the habitats span seven years, demonstrating that the local structure of coevolutionary selection can remain stable across multiple generations. Conservation of the evolutionary processes maintaining long-term biological diversity may require preservation of the conditions that allow a long-term shifting geographic mosaic of coevolutionary hotspots and coldspots.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1

    Thompson, J. N. The Coevolutionary Process (Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, 1994)

  2. 2

    Hochberg, M. E. & van Baalen, M. Antagonistic coevolution over productivity gradients. Am. Nat. 152, 620–634 (1998)

  3. 3

    Nuismer, S. L., Thompson, J. N. & Gomulkiewicz, R. Gene flow and geographically structured coevolution. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266, 605–609 (1999)

  4. 4

    Case, T. J. & Taper, M. L. Interspecific competition, environmental gradients, gene flow, and the coevolution of species' borders. Am. Nat. 155, 583–605 (2000)

  5. 5

    Gomulkiewicz, R., Thompson, J. N., Holt, R. D., Nuismer, S. L. & Hochberg, M. E. Hot spots, cold spots, and the geographic mosaic theory of coevolution. Am. Nat. 156, 156–174 (2000)

  6. 6

    Hochberg, M. E., Gomulkiewicz, R., Holt, R. D. & Thompson, J. N. Weak sinks could cradle mutualisms—strong sources should harbour parasitic symbioses. J. Evol. Biol. 13, 213–222 (2000)

  7. 7

    Nuismer, S. L., Thompson, J. N. & Gomulkiewicz, R. Coevolutionary clines across selection mosaics. Evolution 54, 1102–1115 (2000)

  8. 8

    Holland, J. N. & Fleming, T. H. Geographic and population variation in pollinating seed-consuming interactions between senita cacti (Lophocereus schottii) and senita moths (Upiga virescens). Oecologia 121, 405–410 (1999)

  9. 9

    Berenbaum, M. & Zangerl, A. Chemical phenotype matching between a plant and its insect herbivore. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 13743–13748 (1998)

  10. 10

    Benkman, C. W. The selection mosaic and diversifying coevolution between crossbills and lodgepole pine. Am. Nat. 153, S75–S91 (1999)

  11. 11

    Benkman, C. W., Holimon, W. C. & Smith, J. W. The influence of a competitor on the geographic mosaic of coevolution between crossbills and lodgepole pine. Evolution 55, 282–294 (2001)

  12. 12

    Brodie, E. D. III & Brodie, E. D. Jr Costs of exploiting poisonous prey: evolutionary trade-offs in a predator-prey arms race. Evolution 53, 626–631 (1999)

  13. 13

    Burdon, J. J. & Thrall, P. H. Spatial and temporal patterns in coevolving plant and pathogen associations. Am. Nat. 153, S15–S33 (1999)

  14. 14

    Kraaijeveld, A. R. & Godfray, H. C. J. Geographic patterns in the evolution of resistance and virulence in Drosophila and its parasitoids. Am. Nat. 153, S61–S74 (1999)

  15. 15

    Lively, C. M. Migration, virulence, and the geographic mosaic of adaptation by parasites. Am. Nat. 153, S34–S47 (1999)

  16. 16

    Radtkey, R. R., Fallon, S. M. & Case, T. J. Character displacement in some Cnemidophorus lizards revisited: A phylogenetic analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 9740–9745 (1997)

  17. 17

    Parker, M. A. Mutualism in metapopulations of legumes and rhizobia. Am. Nat. 153, S48–S60 (1999)

  18. 18

    De Jong, P. W., De Vos, H. & Nielsen, J. K. Demic structure and its relation with the distribution of an adaptive trait in Danish flea beetles. Mol. Ecol. 10, 1323–1332 (2001)

  19. 19

    Thompson, J. N. The evolution of species interactions. Science 284, 2116–2118 (1999)

  20. 20

    Thompson, J. N. & Pellmyr, O. Mutualism with pollinating seed parasites amid co-pollinators: constraints on specialization. Ecology 73, 1780–1791 (1992)

  21. 21

    Pellmyr, O. & Thompson, J. N. Sources of variation in pollinator contribution within a guild: the effects of plant and pollinator factors. Oecologia 107, 595–604 (1996)

  22. 22

    Caicco, S. L., Scott, J. M., Butterfield, B. & Csuti, B. A gap analysis of the management status of the vegetation of Idaho (U.S.A.). Conserv. Biol. 9, 498–511 (1995)

  23. 23

    Ricketts, T. H., Dinerstein, E., Olson, D. M. & Loucks, C. J. (eds) Terrestrial Ecoregions of North America: A Conservation Assessment (Island Press, Washington DC, 1999)

  24. 24

    Pellmyr, O., Thompson, J. N., Brown, J. M. & Harrison, R. G. Evolution of pollination and mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. Am. Nat. 148, 827–847 (1996)

  25. 25

    Pellmyr, O. & Thompson, J. N. Multiple occurrences of mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 89, 2927–2929 (1992)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Althoff, E. Bartlett, R. Beck, N. Bonilla, S. Bradford, C. Clark, C. Cody, M. Jacoby, S. Lambert, Y. Martinez, K. Merg, S. Nuismer, J. Olmstead, S. Ringo, K. Segraves, D. Shepard, Z. Stanley and T. Steury for help in the field or laboratory, and R. Calsbeek, D. Hembry, K. Horjus, R. Hufft, N. Janz, K. Merg, S. Nuismer and J. Richardson for helpful discussions on the manuscript. We are grateful for permissions from the Clearwater, Nez Perce, Payette, Salmon, and Umatilla National Forests and from the Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge. This work was supported by the NSF.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Earth and Marine Sciences Building, University of California, Santa Cruz, California, 95064, USA

    • John N. Thompson
  2. School of Life Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, 99164, USA

    • Bradley M. Cunningham

Authors

  1. Search for John N. Thompson in:

  2. Search for Bradley M. Cunningham in:

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John N. Thompson.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Issue Date

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature00810

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.