Back

Independent genetic mapping experiments identify diverse molecular determinants of host adaptation in a generalist herbivore

Villacis-Perez, E.; De Graeve, F.; De Beer, B.; Ali Alshami, S.; de Jong, R.; De Meyer, T.; Van Leeuwen, T.

2024-07-08 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2024.07.05.602111 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Interactions between plants and herbivores promote evolutionary change. Studying the evolution of herbivore mechanisms aimed to cope with diUerent host plant species is a critical intersection between evolutionary biology and sustainable pest management. Generalist herbivores are of particular interest, as hybridization between genetically distinct populations can increase the standing genetic variation and therefore the adaptive potential of the species. Tetranychus urticae is a generalist arthropod known for its adaptive potential, evidenced in its immense host range and ability to develop metabolic resistance to xenobiotics. However, the molecular underpinnings associated with the potential of host adaptation and the consequences of host adaptation in this and many other pests remain elusive. Here, we use two independent, empirical approaches to identify and map the genetic basis of host plant performance and adaptation in genetically distinct populations of T. urticae. In the first approach, we subject a genetically diverse mite population to tomato selection and map genomic regions linked to the phenotypic evolution of increased reproductive performance. In the second approach, we map genomic regions responsible for performance on tomato by comparing the genomes of pooled individuals from a F2 backcross between populations with high and low reproductive performance. Both approaches revealed specific and shared genomic regions associated with host plant performance and adaptation and key candidate genes were identified. Our findings highlight the power of spider mite genetic approaches to identify the complex genetic basis of host adaptation in a generalist herbivore.

Matching journals

The top 5 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.