Back

Ecological specialization and local adaptation in sympatric sexual and asexual grass thrips species

Ghali, K.; van der Kooi, C. J.; Ramella, E.; Henry, M.; Schwander, T.

2024-01-23 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2023.12.01.569600 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The maintenance of sex is difficult to explain in the face of the demographic advantages of asexuality, especially when sexual and asexual lineages co-occur and compete. Here, we test if niche divergence and specialization can contribute to the maintenance of sympatric populations of two closely related, sexual and asexual Aptinothrips grass thrips species. In mesocosm experiments, ecological niches and ecological specialization were inferred from thrips performances on different grass species used as hosts in natural populations. Sexual and asexual thrips performed best on different grass hosts, indicating niche differentiation. The asexual species was also characterized by a broader fundamental ecological niche than the sexual one. However, niche differentiation is unlikely to explain the maintenance of the two species in sympatry because the reproductive rate of asexual females generally exceeded that of sexual ones. Surprisingly, the asexual but not sexual species showed geographic variation in the fundamental niche. This geographic variation likely stems from different clonal assemblages at different locations because different asexual genotypes have different ecological niches. Across natural populations, the performance of asexual females on a specific grass species was further positively correlated with the frequency of that grass species, consistent with adaptation to locally abundant grasses. Altogether, our results suggest that niche differentiation contributes little to the maintenance of grass thrips species with different reproductive modes and that asexuality facilitates adaptation to a diversity of co-occurring host plants.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.