4.7 Article

Co-phylogeny of a hyper-symbiotic system: Endosymbiotic bacteria (Gammaproteobacteria), chewing lice (Insecta: Phthiraptera) and birds (Passeriformes)

Journal

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
Volume 190, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2023.107957

Keywords

Lice; Phthiraptera; Guimaraesiella; Sodalis; Co -evolution; Endosymbiont

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study suggests that the coevolutionary relationships between chewing lice, endosymbiotic bacteria, and birds are not independent, but the patterns vary depending on the analysis method used. Additionally, louse host-switching does not seem to affect bacterial strains.
Chewing lice are hosts to endosymbiotic bacteria as well as themselves being permanent parasites. This offers a unique opportunity to examine the cophylogenetic relationships between three ecologically interconnected organismal groups: birds, chewing lice, and bacteria. Here, we examine the cophylogenetic relationships between lice in the genus Guimaraesiella Eichler, 1949, their endosymbiotic Sodalis-allied bacteria, and a range of bird species from across South China. Both event and distance-based cophylogenetic analyses were explored to compare phylogenies of the three organismal groups. Pair-wise comparisons between lice-endosymbionts and bird-endosymbionts indicated that their evolutionary histories are not independent. However, comparisons between lice and birds, showed mixed results; the distance-based method of ParaFit indicated that their evolutionary histories are not independent, while the event-based method of Jane indicated that their phylogenies were no more congruent than expected by chance. Notably, louse host-switching does not seem to have affected bacterial strains, as conspecific lice sampled from distantly related hosts share bacteria belonging to the same clade.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available