Jeremias Martin Becker1, Matthias Liess2. 1. Department System Ecotoxicology, UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Permoserstrasse 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany Department of Ecosystem Analysis, RWTH-Aachen University, Institute for Environmental Research, Worringerweg 1, 52074 Aachen, Germany jeremias.becker@ufz.de. 2. Department System Ecotoxicology, UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Permoserstrasse 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany Department of Ecosystem Analysis, RWTH-Aachen University, Institute for Environmental Research, Worringerweg 1, 52074 Aachen, Germany.
Abstract
The genetic recovery of resistant populations released from pesticide exposure is accelerated by the presence of environmental stressors. By contrast, the relevance of environmental stressors for the spread of resistance during pesticide exposure has not been studied. Moreover, the consequences of interactions between different stressors have not been considered. Here we show that stress through intraspecific competition accelerates microevolution, because it enhances fitness differences between adapted and non-adapted individuals. By contrast, stress through interspecific competition or predation reduces intraspecific competition and thereby delays microevolution. This was demonstrated in mosquito populations (Culex quinquefasciatus) that were exposed to the pesticide chlorpyrifos. Non-selective predation through harvesting and interspecific competition with Daphnia magna delayed the selection for individuals carrying the ace-1(R) resistance allele. Under non-toxic conditions, susceptible individuals without ace-1(R) prevailed. Likewise, predation delayed the reverse adaptation of the populations to a non-toxic environment, while the effect of interspecific competition was not significant. Applying a simulation model, we further identified how microevolution is generally determined by the type and degree of competition and predation. We infer that interactions with other species-especially strong in ecosystems with high biodiversity-can delay the development of pesticide resistance.
The genetic recovery of resistant populations released from pesticide exposure is accelerated by the presence of environmental stressors. By contrast, the relevance of environmental stressors for the spread of resistance during pesticide exposure has not been studied. Moreover, the consequences of interactions between different stressors have not been considered. Here we show that stress through intraspecific competition accelerates microevolution, because it enhances fitness differences between adapted and non-adapted individuals. By contrast, stress through interspecific competition or predation reduces intraspecific competition and thereby delays microevolution. This was demonstrated in mosquito populations (Culex quinquefasciatus) that were exposed to the pesticide chlorpyrifos. Non-selective predation through harvesting and interspecific competition with Daphnia magna delayed the selection for individuals carrying the ace-1(R) resistance allele. Under non-toxic conditions, susceptible individuals without ace-1(R) prevailed. Likewise, predation delayed the reverse adaptation of the populations to a non-toxic environment, while the effect of interspecific competition was not significant. Applying a simulation model, we further identified how microevolution is generally determined by the type and degree of competition and predation. We infer that interactions with other species-especially strong in ecosystems with high biodiversity-can delay the development of pesticide resistance.
Entities:
Keywords:
Culex quinquefasciatus; competition; ecotoxicology; pesticide resistance; population ecology; predation
Genetic adaptation to anthropogenic toxicants has become increasingly important to
the survival of populations because of environmental pollution. The failure of
populations to adapt to toxicants is contributing to the biodiversity crisis [1,2]. At the same time, agricultural pests and
pathogen vectors have rapidly evolved high levels of resistance to pesticides [3-6]. For example, resistance against 300 insecticides
from all chemical classes commercially available has been reported in more than 500
target arthropod species worldwide, presenting challenges to conventional control
strategies [4,7]. Therefore, understanding the
basic processes that govern such extensive genetic adaptation is of high
relevance.The emergence of resistance to toxicants typically arises through simple mutations at
a single locus. For example, the ace-1 allele, which
has evolved in several mosquito species, is characterized by a point mutation that
leads to a modified acetylcholinesterase (AChE), which provides high resistance
against organophosphorus and carbamate insecticides [8]. Individuals carrying such a resistance allele
typically display reduced fitness under non-toxic conditions, manifested, for
example, in lower survival and delayed development [9,10]. This phenomenon facilitates the genetic recovery of a largely
resistant population back to one dominated by susceptible individuals when toxicants
are not present [11].The fitness costs of pesticide resistance under non-toxic conditions generally
increase in the presence of additional ecological stressors [12-14]. Therefore, additional stressors may hinder the
development of resistance through increased fitness costs. This concept has led to a
new area of research in evolutionary ecology [12]. For example, food shortages, poor food
quality, toxicants not related to the developed resistance and selection by
parasites or predators have increased the fitness costs of pesticide resistance in
experiments under non-toxic conditions [11-18].However, these studies did not consider the evolutionary effects of multiple
interacting ecological stressors. Moreover, the effects of ecological stressors on
the actual spread of resistance alleles under toxicant exposure have rarely been
studied.Here we addressed how interacting biotic stressors can affect microevolution in terms
of both genetic adaptation and genetic recovery. While the primacy of biotic over
abiotic stressors in driving selection has been proposed before [19], we focus on the way biotic
stressors modify the adaptation to abiotic stressors such as pesticides. We
hypothesized that (i) intraspecific competition promotes genetic recovery under
non-toxic conditions because it enhances the fitness costs of pesticide resistance
[20]; (ii) predation and
interspecific competition mitigate this enhancement through a reduction of
population density and hereby delay genetic recovery; and (iii) these mechanisms
operate similarly on the spread of resistance under pesticide exposure.
Material and methods
We tested our predictions using selection experiments on the southern house mosquito,
Culex quinquefasciatus Say, 1823, which is a common target
species in the control of disease vectors. Mixed populations of susceptible
wild-type individuals (ss) and heterozygous (sr) or homozygous (rr) individuals
carrying the ace-1 resistance allele [21] were reared over six
generations in a laboratory test system (see the electronic supplementary material
for details). The larval density and biomass were monitored using a non-invasive
image analysis system [22]. Each
population was initiated with 400 larvae and an ace-1
allele frequency of 0.5 in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. From each population,
45 deceased adult mosquitoes per generation were genotyped using an AChE activity
test [23], and the
ace-1 genotype and allele frequencies were
estimated. In addition, we measured the size of the genotyped mosquitoes from the
first, second and sixth generations as the length of one randomly chosen wing.Four populations were reared without species interactions; therefore, they approached
carrying capacity and experienced a high level of intraspecific competition after
one generation. In another four populations, approximately 10–20% of
the larvae were randomly harvested twice per week using a sweep net to simulate the
general effects of non-selective predation. In another four populations, we
introduced 200 individuals of the water flea Daphnia magna at the
beginning of the experiment, imposing interspecific competition on the mosquito
larvae. These treatments were applied once without pesticide exposure and were
repeated with another set of populations in which the mosquito larvae were exposed
to 0.375 µg l−1 of chlorpyrifos for 24 h each generation.
This concentration was chosen to dispatch greater than 50% of the homozygous
susceptible larvae without causing acute effects on the heterozygous and resistant
individuals (electronic supplementary material, figure S1), based on standard
toxicity tests prior to the experiment [24]. Daphnia magna is more sensitive to chlorpyrifos
than C. quinquefasciatus [25] and therefore was not contaminated in this
experiment to ensure stable populations that act as interspecific competitors.The data were analysed using general or generalized linear models with the software R
v. 3.0.2. Mixed effects models were applied to account for repeated measurements
where appropriate. The homoscedasticity and normality of the residuals were
evaluated prior to the analyses, and most models were simplified to the minimum
adequate model using backward selection based on likelihood ratio tests [26] (see the electronic
supplementary material for details). The p-values were adjusted for
multiple comparisons by applying either Tukey's post hoc tests or the Holm
correction.To interpret our results, we modelled the general exchange of two alleles providing
unequal fitness to their carriers within an idealized, density-regulated population.
We studied how the development of the allele and genotype frequencies changed when
the population size was additionally affected by predation or interspecific
competition under different scenarios. For this, we combined the traditional models
of predation and interspecific competition from Lotka–Volterra [27-29] and applied the Hardy–Weinberg principle
[30,31] to each generation to account for the mixing of
genotypes during reproduction (see the electronic supplementary material for
details). We considered inheritance to vary from functionally recessive to dominant,
which is commonly observed for pesticide resistance and the associated fitness costs
in a non-toxic environment, but excluded scenarios with overdominance that have
rarely been reported [10,32,33]. The model was built in R v. 3.0.2.
Results
Reference populations
In the reference populations, which lacked predation or interspecific
competition, larval density and biomass of the mosquitoes reached an equilibrium
state at approximately 41 individuals l−1, or 20.9 mg
l−1 within one generation. This equilibrium indicated the
carrying capacity of the populations. An overall decrease in adult body size
over the course of the experiment suggested high levels of intraspecific
competition among the mosquito larvae (p < 0.001, figure 1a).
Exposure to chlorpyrifos did not reduce the average larval density (figure 1b) or
biomass in the reference populations. The overproduction of young larvae, which
otherwise starved during larval development, probably compensated for the
mortality caused by the pesticide. Instead, pesticide exposure reduced the
average abundance of adult mosquitoes in all populations from 26.6 to 21.7
individuals (p = 0.002). This reduction pointed to
decreased developmental success because of the delayed effects of pulse
contamination and the reduced performance associated with the resistance allele.
Figure 1.
Predation and interspecific competition modify the performance of
susceptible and pesticide-resistant Culex
quinquesfaciatus mosquitoes. (a) The
effects of interspecific competition and artificial predation on the
decrease in the mean wing length of the first, second and sixth
generation across all genotypes. Individuals = 3039.
Populations = 4 (random factor). (b) Larval
population density in non-contaminated and contaminated populations
without further treatment (ref.), with artificial predation (pred.),
and with interspecific competition by Daphnia magna
(inter.). N = 4 (populations). The means
± s.e.m. are shown; the asterisks indicate significant
deviations from the reference populations;
*p < 0.05,
***p < 0.001.
Predation and interspecific competition modify the performance of
susceptible and pesticide-resistant Culex
quinquesfaciatus mosquitoes. (a) The
effects of interspecific competition and artificial predation on the
decrease in the mean wing length of the first, second and sixth
generation across all genotypes. Individuals = 3039.
Populations = 4 (random factor). (b) Larval
population density in non-contaminated and contaminated populations
without further treatment (ref.), with artificial predation (pred.),
and with interspecific competition by Daphnia magna
(inter.). N = 4 (populations). The means
± s.e.m. are shown; the asterisks indicate significant
deviations from the reference populations;
*p < 0.05,
***p < 0.001.The monitoring of the genotype and allele frequencies revealed a rapid process of
microevolution. The populations without pesticide exposure shed the costly
resistance allele, with the frequency of ace-1
decreasing from 50 to 28% over the course of the experiment
(p < 0.001; electronic supplementary material,
figure S2). In particular, homozygous susceptible individuals (ss) increased in
frequency from 25 to 60% in these populations (p
< 0.001, figure
2a) and displaced the other genotypes, particularly
heterozygous individuals (sr). By contrast, in the populations with pesticide
exposure, the frequency of ace-1 increased from 50
to 76% (p < 0.001; electronic supplementary
material, figure S2e). We observed a particularly strong
selection against ss. The frequency of this genotype decreased from 25 to
5% (p < 0.001, figure 2b), whereas the
frequency of rr increased from 25 to 56% (p <
0.001; electronic supplementary material, figure S2d) by the
end of the experiment. The frequency of sr declined more slowly than in the
non-contaminated populations (p < 0.001; electronic
supplementary material, figure S2a,b).
Figure 2.
(a) In populations of the mosquito Culex
quinquefasciatus, non-selective predation (pred.) and
interspecific competition (inter.) delay the increase of the
homozygous susceptible (ss) genotype frequency under non-toxic
conditions, compared to reference populations (ref.) without species
interactions. (b) Non-selective predation and
interspecific competition also delay the decrease of the homozygous
susceptible (ss) genotype frequency when the species is exposed to a
pesticide. N = 4 for each group of
populations. The points represent the mean values for each
generation and were calculated using separate generalized linear
models with a binomial error distribution for each generation. The
lines represent the trend over all generations, which was analysed
using a generalized linear mixed effects model with the
log-transformed generations included as a covariate; the intercepts
were fixed at the known initial genotype or allele frequency. The
means ± s.e.m. are reported. The asterisks indicate
significant contrasts; *p < 0.05,
**p < 0.01.
(a) In populations of the mosquito Culex
quinquefasciatus, non-selective predation (pred.) and
interspecific competition (inter.) delay the increase of the
homozygous susceptible (ss) genotype frequency under non-toxic
conditions, compared to reference populations (ref.) without species
interactions. (b) Non-selective predation and
interspecific competition also delay the decrease of the homozygous
susceptible (ss) genotype frequency when the species is exposed to a
pesticide. N = 4 for each group of
populations. The points represent the mean values for each
generation and were calculated using separate generalized linear
models with a binomial error distribution for each generation. The
lines represent the trend over all generations, which was analysed
using a generalized linear mixed effects model with the
log-transformed generations included as a covariate; the intercepts
were fixed at the known initial genotype or allele frequency. The
means ± s.e.m. are reported. The asterisks indicate
significant contrasts; *p < 0.05,
**p < 0.01.
Predation
Predation released the mosquito larvae from high intraspecific competition, as
indicated by the larger adult body size (measured as wing length;
p = 0.005, figure 1a) and slightly higher fecundity, compared
with the reference populations (0.78 versus 0.62 egg rafts per female,
p = 0.053). A higher fecundity, probably combined
with the reduced density-dependent larval mortality, compensated for the removal
of larvae, such that the biomass and density of the larval populations remained
stable (figure
1b). Under non-toxic conditions, ss displaced sr and
rr more slowly compared to the reference populations, (p
= 0.043, figure
2a). Similarly, under pesticide pressure, the
selection against ss was reduced (p = 0.005, figure 2b).
Additionally, the adult body size of ss individuals decreased more strongly than
that of rr mosquitoes under pesticide pressure. Under non-toxic conditions,
primarily the size of the rr individuals decreased (p <
0.001). This finding indicates that ss individuals suffered not only from acute
mortality during contamination but also from reduced developmental success
afterwards. By contrast, the ace-1 allele was
associated with reduced developmental success under non-toxic conditions.
Interspecific competition
Interspecific competition with D. magna reduced the average
density (p < 0.001, figure 1b) and biomass of the
larval mosquito populations (20.9 versus 12.1 mg l−1,
p < 0.001). This reduction was considerably greater
(p < 0.001 for density and p
= 0.026 for biomass) in the contaminated compared with the
non-contaminated populations, probably because the strongest competitors among
the mosquito larvae (ss) were debilitated as a result of pesticide exposure.
This debilitation should have enabled D. magna to exploit more
of the resources at the expense of the growth of the mosquito larvae. However,
we did not observe an increase in the average density and biomass of the
D. magna populations when they competed with the
contaminated larvae. Interspecific competition generally caused the adult
mosquitoes to remain small throughout the experiment; this size probably
reflects their lower size limit (figure 1a). Interspecific competition slowed the
selection against the least-adapted genotype (figure 2). This effect was present both under
toxic and non-toxic conditions but was statistically significant only under
pesticide exposure in which ss was displaced more slowly than in the reference
populations (p = 0.018).
Discussion
Predation slowed both the genetic adaptation of our experimental populations to a
pesticide and their genetic recovery from resistance under non-toxic conditions.
Interspecific competition had the same effect but was only significant on the
genetic adaptation under pesticide exposure. To ascertain the mechanisms that
probably explain these results, we developed a simulation model based on the
combined equations for predation and interspecific competition from
Lotka–Volterra. We extended this model with the Hardy–Weinberg
principle to consider microevolution (see the electronic supplementary material for
details).
Intraspecific competition
In general, fitness costs can affect various fitness components that are
represented by three parameters in our model: the intrinsic growth rate
r, the carrying capacity k and the
relative competitive strength (expressed in the competition coefficients
c). A complete genotype and allele displacement was
observed in the model when homozygous susceptible (ss), heterozygous (sr) and
homozygous resistant (rr) individuals differed either in their carrying capacity
or their competitive strength or both. The pace of displacement increased when a
population approached carrying capacity. In this situation, intraspecific
competition enhanced the contrast of fitness between the individuals of
different genotypes because individuals with high fitness consume the limited
resources at the expense of individuals with low fitness. This is in concordance
with previous studies showing that intraspecific competition increases
inequalities among individuals of various plant and animal populations [20,34]. Higher intrinsic growth rates increased
intraspecific competition when populations were close to carrying capacity and
expedited the process of microevolution in the model.In our experiment, the reference populations were close to carrying capacity;
therefore, intraspecific competition promoted the fast displacement of the
costly ace-1 allele under non-toxic conditions
(figure
3a,b). We assume that in the contaminated
populations, intraspecific competition increased the displacement of ss
individuals in a similar way. Toxicants considerably affect the performance and
development of susceptible individuals that survived a pulse exposure [35-37], causing ss individuals to be competitively
inferior to sr and rr individuals. Although acute mortality decreases the
population size during contamination, survivors typically experience increased
intraspecific competition afterwards because the population recovers through
increased growth and reproduction [38-40].
Figure 3.
Simulation of the microevolutionary effects of predation and
interspecific competition. The growth parameters of the extended
Lotka–Volterra model were fitted to our experimental
conditions (see electronic supplementary materials). Non-selective
predation (pred.) and interspecific competition (inter.) delay the
increase of susceptible (ss) individuals under non-toxic conditions
(a) and the selection against ss individuals
under toxic conditions (c). For comparison, the
dotted lines represent the average change of the ss genotype
frequencies measured in the experiment.
(b,d) The simulated population
sizes of the mosquitoes and of the interspecific competitor
(D. magna). For comparison, the dotted lines
represent the average population sizes over time measured in the
experiment. See the electronic supplementary material, table S5 for
the parameter values.
Simulation of the microevolutionary effects of predation and
interspecific competition. The growth parameters of the extended
Lotka–Volterra model were fitted to our experimental
conditions (see electronic supplementary materials). Non-selective
predation (pred.) and interspecific competition (inter.) delay the
increase of susceptible (ss) individuals under non-toxic conditions
(a) and the selection against ss individuals
under toxic conditions (c). For comparison, the
dotted lines represent the average change of the ss genotype
frequencies measured in the experiment.
(b,d) The simulated population
sizes of the mosquitoes and of the interspecific competitor
(D. magna). For comparison, the dotted lines
represent the average population sizes over time measured in the
experiment. See the electronic supplementary material, table S5 for
the parameter values.Predation reduces the abundance of the prey population and consequently decreases
intraspecific competition. In our experiment, such competitive release delayed
the displacement of the least-adapted genotype, i.e. rr under non-toxic
conditions and ss under toxicant pressure.Predation significantly affected only the frequency of the ss genotype whereas we
did not find significant effects on the other genotype frequencies nor on the
allele frequencies. We expected this result because previous studies showed that
the overall fitness costs associated with ace-1
under non-toxic conditions were mostly dominant [41-43]. Therefore, in our non-contaminated
populations, selection acted primarily between ss individuals on the one hand
(contributing only to the frequency of the susceptible allele) and sr and rr
individuals on the other hand (contributing to both the susceptible and the
resistant allele). In this situation, any environmental factor that reduces
selection pressure most strongly affects the frequency of ss. Similarly, in the
contaminated populations the fitness of sr and rr were more similar than that of
ss. This is because the pesticide concentration used considerably affected only
ss but neither sr nor rr (electronic supplementary material, figure S1). Again,
a reduction of selection pressure most strongly affects the frequency of ss in
this situation. The assumption of dominant fitness costs under non-toxic
conditions and of dominant resistance under toxic conditions is further
supported by our observation that the frequency of sr decreased faster under
non-toxic conditions (electronic supplementary material, figure S2): under toxic
conditions, sr decreased as a consequence of the Hardy–Weinberg principle
when the allele frequencies departed from 0.5 [44]. By contrast, under non-toxic conditions,
selection contributed to the decrease of sr.The delay of microevolution through predation could be reproduced in our model
(figure
3a,b), although the effect size under toxic
conditions was smaller than observed in the experiment. However, the model did
not consider that intraspecific competition increases the sensitivity of
susceptible organisms to toxicants [33,45]. Hence, in
real populations, selection against ss individuals may increase even more
strongly with population density than predicted by our model.The model shows further that the evolutionary effects of non-selective predation
actually depend on the life-history traits that are affected by fitness
inequalities. If an allele is associated with a reduced carrying capacity or
reduced competitive strength, predation delays its displacement. By contrast,
predation promotes allele displacement if the allele predominantly decreases the
intrinsic growth rate (figure
4a). If the allele affects all three parameters
rather equally, predation delays microevolution. Because the fitness costs of
pesticide resistance alleles usually affect various traits simultaneously [15,43,46], we therefore conclude that in most cases non-selective
predation should delay microevolution.
Figure 4.
Sensitivity analysis of the simulation model. The effect sizes of
predation and interspecific competition on microevolution were
measured in % additional time until the genotype frequency of
the susceptible wild-type reached 0.99 under non-toxic conditions.
Negative effect sizes represent an acceleration of microevolution.
The parameters given on the axes were varied whereas all other
parameter values were held constant. The black dots indicate the
parameter values that represent our experimental conditions and were
used in figure
3a,b. (a) The delay
through predation increases with the ratio of the fitness costs on
the intrinsic growth rate and the carrying capacity and
(b) increases with the predation rate, but
decreases with the preference of a predator for individuals carrying
the resistance allele. (c) The delay through
interspecific competition is the largest at an intermediate carrying
capacity and competitive strength of the competing species.
(d) The delay through interspecific competition
increases with the degree of niche overlap and the imbalance of
niche overlap between wild-type individuals and pesticide-resistant
individuals.
Sensitivity analysis of the simulation model. The effect sizes of
predation and interspecific competition on microevolution were
measured in % additional time until the genotype frequency of
the susceptible wild-type reached 0.99 under non-toxic conditions.
Negative effect sizes represent an acceleration of microevolution.
The parameters given on the axes were varied whereas all other
parameter values were held constant. The black dots indicate the
parameter values that represent our experimental conditions and were
used in figure
3a,b. (a) The delay
through predation increases with the ratio of the fitness costs on
the intrinsic growth rate and the carrying capacity and
(b) increases with the predation rate, but
decreases with the preference of a predator for individuals carrying
the resistance allele. (c) The delay through
interspecific competition is the largest at an intermediate carrying
capacity and competitive strength of the competing species.
(d) The delay through interspecific competition
increases with the degree of niche overlap and the imbalance of
niche overlap between wild-type individuals and pesticide-resistant
individuals.In contrast with our experiment, natural predators may selectively feed on
individuals with reduced fitness and promote microevolution [14,47]. Our model shows that such selection may
actually accelerate microevolution if the preference of the predator for the
prey with reduced fitness exceeds a threshold at 12% given the scenario from our
experiment (figure
4b). By contrast, at lower preference as realised in
our experiment, the delay of microevolution through the release from
intraspecific competition is the most important effect. Even if our method of
harvesting might have slightly favoured fitter individuals with a higher escape
swimming activity, this mild selection pressure is therefore unlikely to
considerably affect the observed effects of artificial predation.Interspecific competition partly replaces intraspecific competition, particularly
when populations are close to the carrying capacity. During the growth phase, it
adds to the overall competition pressure faced by a population. Similar to
intraspecific competitors, interspecific competitors consume resources at the
expense of the genotype with the lowest fitness. Therefore, interspecific
competition promotes microevolution in our model when the carrying capacity and
the relative competitive strength of the interspecific competitor are high
(figure
4c). By contrast, in the experiment we observed that
interspecific competition slowed the genetic adaptation to a pesticide (and also
the genetic recovery under non-toxic conditions, although this effect was not
significant). This can be explained only if we assume that interspecific
competitors interact more strongly with adapted individuals with high
fitness.Considering the niche theory, we suggest that this mechanism is a common case and
explains our experimental results: coexisting competitors are characterized by
niches that partially overlap. Genotypes with a reduced niche width are less
affected by interspecific competition (figure 5). Fitness costs narrow the fundamental niche of individuals
carrying the resistance allele: several studies have shown that fitness costs
associated with resistance to toxicants increase under challenging conditions in
which a species encounters the edge of its ecological niche [9,13,17]. For example, insects resistant to Bt toxins were found to
suffer a disproportionally high mortality when grown on a suboptimal food source
under non-toxic conditions [13,17].
Therefore, we expect that interspecific competition primarily affects
individuals with high fitness and this way delays microevolution.
Figure 5.
Hypothetical resource utilization of susceptible (ss) and
pesticide-resistant (rr) individuals of a species. The area under
each curve represents the competitive strength of the genotype. When
fitness costs narrow the ecological niche of the rr individuals,
interspecific competitors (inter.) with a different resource
preference affect ss individuals more strongly than rr
individuals.
Hypothetical resource utilization of susceptible (ss) and
pesticide-resistant (rr) individuals of a species. The area under
each curve represents the competitive strength of the genotype. When
fitness costs narrow the ecological niche of the rr individuals,
interspecific competitors (inter.) with a different resource
preference affect ss individuals more strongly than rr
individuals.Under this assumption, interspecific competition delays microevolution in our
model (figure 3). The niche of
the interspecific competitor could overlap most strongly with the smaller niche
of the inferior genotype only if there is a very large overlap in the resources
used by the two species. In this case, our model predicts that interspecific
competition accelerates microevolution (figure 4d). However, this
situation is expected to be rare in natural communities because insufficient
niche separation is prevented by competitive exclusion [20].In our experiment, we estimated that the resources used by C.
quinquefasciatus and the competing D. magna
overlapped by 80% (see the electronic supplementary materials), allowing
coexistence for several generations. In the non-contaminated populations,
interspecific competition restricted the fitness advantage of ss and thus
delayed the displacement of sr and rr. Conversely, in the contaminated
populations, rr was expected to have a broader resource spectrum and to be
competitively superior to ss because toxicants confine the niche breadth of
susceptible organisms [48].
For example, Bourguet et al. [33] showed that under high pesticide stress in
which resistance was functionally recessive, the mortality of sr larvae
increased more than that of rr larvae with water depth, i.e. the diving time for
food search. Thus, it is likely that after the moderate pesticide stress in our
experiment, D. magna competed predominantly with the
well-performing sr and rr individuals in the water column and therefore delayed
the displacement of the ss individuals with reduced diving ability.In this experiment, we contaminated only the mosquito larvae but not the
interspecific competitor, reflecting the scenario of a highly selective
pesticide. If competing species are similarly affected by a broad-spectrum
pesticide, the niche breadth of each species is reduced to their optimum
resources. This may increase the observed evolutionary effect of interspecific
competition if the competitor shares its optimum resources with the resistant
mosquito larvae, as was presumably the case in our experiment. Conversely, the
evolutionary effect may decrease if the niches of both species overlap only
slightly and therefore separate under toxic conditions.
Conclusion
We observed that non-selective predation and interspecific competition slowed
microevolution within a population, delaying both the genetic adaptation to a
pesticide and the genetic recovery after pesticide exposure. This delay can be best
explained by a reduction of intraspecific competition, which acts as a driver of
microevolution. The size and direction of the microevolutionary effects of predation
and interspecific competition depend on the life-history traits that are affected by
fitness costs; these effects were small in our experiment but accumulate when acting
over many generations. A common scenario for pest and vector species is a low
initial frequency of a resistance allele and alternating selection pressure from
pesticide treatments and subsequent genetic recovery [3,49]. With the parameter values from our experiment, our simulation model
demonstrates that predation and interspecific competition considerably delay the
spread of the resistance allele in such a scenario (figure 6). Here the overall pace of microevolution
represents a balance of increasing resistance during contaminated generations and
decreasing resistance during non-contaminated generations. A small delay of both
processes considerably prolongs the time until the resistance allele becomes fixed
within a population. Hence, species interactions—especially strong in diverse
communities—may support pesticide resistance management, an ecosystem service
of biodiversity not considered so far.
Figure 6.
Simulation of the spread of a resistance allele r in a population
alternately treated with a pesticide for three generations (red bars),
while the subsequent two generations can genetically recover. The
initial genotype frequencies were ss = 98%, sr =
1.99% and rr = 0.01% With the same parameter values
applied as in figure
3a, predation (pred.) and interspecific
competition (inter.) delay the increase of pesticide resistance.
Simulation of the spread of a resistance allele r in a population
alternately treated with a pesticide for three generations (red bars),
while the subsequent two generations can genetically recover. The
initial genotype frequencies were ss = 98%, sr =
1.99% and rr = 0.01% With the same parameter values
applied as in figure
3a, predation (pred.) and interspecific
competition (inter.) delay the increase of pesticide resistance.
Authors: Ben J Kefford; David Buchwalter; Miguel Cañedo-Argüelles; Jenny Davis; Richard P Duncan; Ary Hoffmann; Ross Thompson Journal: Biol Lett Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 3.703
Authors: Thomas Scheuerl; Meirion Hopkins; Reuben W Nowell; Damian W Rivett; Timothy G Barraclough; Thomas Bell Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 14.919