Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do ecological niches differ between sexual and asexual lineages of an aphid species?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Evolutionary Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to environmental-based theories on the maintenance of sexual reproduction, sexual and asexual populations may coexist if they occupy different ecological niches. The aphid Rhopalosiphum padi offers a good opportunity to test this hypothesis since sexual and asexual lineages show local coexistence during a large part of their respective life-cycles. Because these two reproductive variants are morphologically identical but genetically distinct, we first characterized them using genetic markers in populations of R. padi in areas where sexual and asexual lineages may occur in sympatry. We then inferred the natal host plant of sexual and asexual genotypes by analysing stable isotopic ratios and showed that sexual ones mostly originated from C3 Poaceae while asexual ones originated from C3 and C4 plants, although the majority came from C4 Poaceae. These findings indicate that ecological niches of sexual and asexual lineages of R. padi differ, offering a plausible explanation for the local coexistence of the two reproductive modes in this species through habitat specialisation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bell G (1982) The masterpiece of nature, the evolution and genetics of sexuality. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi FJJA, Booij CJH, Tscharntke T (2006) Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 273:1715–1727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boecklen WJ, Yarnes CT, Cook BA, James AC (2011) On the use of stable isotopes in trophic ecology. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 42:411–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Case TJ, Taper ML (1986) On the coexistence and coevolution of asexual and sexual competitors. Evolution 40:366–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmotte F (2001) Evolution des modes de reproduction chez le puceron Rhopalosiphum padi (L.): apports de la génétique des populations et de la phylogénie moléculaire. Thèse de doctorat. pp. Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Agronomie de Rennes, Rennes

  • Delmotte F, Leterme N, Gauthier JP, Rispe C, Simon JC (2002) Genetic architecture of sexual and asexual populations of the aphid Rhopalosiphum padi based on allozyme and microsatellite markers. Mol Ecol 11:711–723

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Doncaster CP, Pound GE, Cox SJ (2000) The ecological cost of sex. Nature 404:281–285

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An R companion to applied regression, second edition. Thousand Oaks, Sage. http://www.r-project.org/package/car

  • Gilabert A, Simon JC, Mieuzet L, Halkett F, Stoeckel S, Plantegenest M, Dedryver CA (2009) Climate and agricultural context shape reproductive mode variation in an aphid crop pest. Mol Ecol 18:3050–3061

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Glesener RR, Tilman D (1978) Sexuality and components of environmental uncertainty: clues from geographic parthenogenesis in terrestrial animals. Am Nat 112:659–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haag CR, Ebert D (2004) A new hypothesis to explain geographic parthenogenesis. Ann Zool Fenn 41:539–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Halkett F, Plantegenest M, Prunier-Leterme N, Mieuzet L, Delmotte F, Simon JC (2005) Admixed sexual and facultatively asexual aphid lineages at mating sites. Mol Ecol 14:325–336

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Halkett F, Plantegenest M, Bonhomme J, Simon JC (2008) Gene flow between sexual and facultatively asexual lineages of an aphid species and the maintenance of reproductive mode variation. Mol Ecol 17:2998–3007

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hartfield M, Keightley PD (2012) Current hypotheses for the evolution of sex and recombination. Integr Zool 7:192–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann AA, Reynolds KT, Nash MA, Weeks AR (2008) A high incidence of parthenogenesis in agricultural pests. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 275:2473–2481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondrashov AS (1988) Deleterious mutations and the evolution of sexual reproduction. Nature 336:435–440

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Layman CA, Araujo MS, Boucek R, Hammerschlag-Peyer CM, Harrison E, Jud ZR, Matich P, Rosenblatt AE, Vaudo JJ, Yeager LA, Post DM, Bearhop S (2012) Applying stable isotopes to examine food-web structure: an overview of analytical tools. Biol Rev 87:545–562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lehto MP, Haag CR (2010) Ecological differentiation between coexisting sexual and asexual strains of Daphnia pulex. J Anim Ecol 79:1241–1250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch M (1984) Destabilizing hybridization, general-purpose genotypes and geographic parthenogenesis. Q Rev Biol 59:257–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mole S, Joern A, Oleary MH, Madhavan S (1994) Spatial and temporal variation in carbon isotope discrimination in prairie graminoids. Oecologia 97:316–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller HJ (1964) The relation of recombination to mutational advance. Mutat Res 1:2–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plantegenest M, Le May C, Fabre F (2007) Landscape epidemiology of plant diseases. J R Soc Interface 4:963–972

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. pp. R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2009, Vienna, Austria

  • Rispe C, Simon J-C, Pierre J-S (1996) Fitness comparison between clones differing in their ability to produce sexuals in the aphid Rhopalosiphum padi. Entomol Exp Appl 80:469–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon J-C, Rispe C, Sunnucks P (2002) Ecology and evolution of sex in aphids. Trends Ecol Evol 17:34–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandel A (1928) La parthénogénèse géographique. Contribution à l’étude biologique et cytologique de la parthénogénèse naturelle. Bulletin biologique de la France et de la Belgique 62:164–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Vialatte A, Dedryver CA, Simon JC, Galman M, Plantegenest M (2005) Limited genetic exchanges between populations of an insect pest living on uncultivated and related cultivated host plants. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 272:1075–1082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vialatte A, Simon J-C, Dedryver C-A, Fabre F, Plantegenest M (2006) Tracing individual movements of aphids reveals preferential routes of population transfers in agroecosystems. Ecol Appl 16:839–844

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • West SA, Lively CM, Read AF (1999) A pluralist approach to sex and recombination. J Evol Biol 12:1003–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank J-F. Le Gallic, P. Lhomme and L. Mieuzet for their help with sampling and genotyping, and T. Forde and J. Foucaud for comments on the manuscript. Isotopic analyses were performed at the Mylnefield Research Services (Scotland, UK). This research was supported by Bayer CropScience France and a CIFRE grant from the Association Nationale de la Recherche Technique.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Aude Gilabert

    Present address: MIVEGEC (UMR CNRS/IRD/UM1/UM2 5290), CHRU de Montpellier, 39 Avenue Charles Flahault, 34295, Montpellier, France

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INRA UMR 1349 IGEPP, Domaine de la Motte, 35653, Le Rheu, France

    Aude Gilabert, Jean-Christophe Simon & Charles-Antoine Dedryver

  2. Agrocampus-ouest UMR 1349 IGEPP, 65 rue de St-Brieuc - CS 84215, 35042, Rennes Cedex, France

    Manuel Plantegenest

Authors
  1. Aude Gilabert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean-Christophe Simon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Charles-Antoine Dedryver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Manuel Plantegenest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Aude Gilabert or Manuel Plantegenest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gilabert, A., Simon, JC., Dedryver, CA. et al. Do ecological niches differ between sexual and asexual lineages of an aphid species?. Evol Ecol 28, 1095–1104 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-014-9730-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-014-9730-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation