scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Megan E. Frederickson

Bio: Megan E. Frederickson is an academic researcher from University of Toronto. The author has contributed to research in topics: Mutualism (biology) & Rhizobia. The author has an hindex of 24, co-authored 67 publications receiving 1987 citations. Previous affiliations of Megan E. Frederickson include Harvard University & Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explored patterns of phylogenetic correlation in the distribution of gut bacteria among species of turtle ants (genus Cephalotes), which host a dense gut microbial community.
Abstract: Correlation between gut microbiota and host phylogeny could reflect codiversification over shared evolutionary history or a selective environment that is more similar in related hosts. These alternatives imply substantial differences in the relationship between host and symbiont, but can they be distinguished based on patterns in the community data themselves? We explored patterns of phylogenetic correlation in the distribution of gut bacteria among species of turtle ants (genus Cephalotes), which host a dense gut microbial community. We used 16S rRNA pyrosequencing from 25 Cephalotes species to show that their gut community is remarkably stable, from the colony to the genus level. Despite this overall similarity, the existing differences among species' microbiota significantly correlated with host phylogeny. We introduced a novel analytical technique to test whether these phylogenetic correlations are derived from recent bacterial evolution, as would be expected in the case of codiversification, or from broader shifts more likely to reflect environmental filters imposed by factors such as diet or habitat. We also tested this technique on a published data set of ape microbiota, confirming earlier results while revealing previously undescribed patterns of phylogenetic correlation. Our results indicated a high degree of partner fidelity in the Cephalotes microbiota, suggesting that vertical transmission of the entire community could play an important role in the evolution and maintenance of the association. As additional comparative microbiota data become available, the techniques presented here can be used to explore trends in the evolution of host-associated microbial communities.

248 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recent work at the interface of economic game theory and evolutionary biology that provides new insights into the evolution of partner choice, host sanctions, partner fidelity feedback and public goods are reviewed.
Abstract: We review recent work at the interface of economic game theory and evolutionary biology that provides new insights into the evolution of partner choice, host sanctions, partner fidelity feedback and public goods. (1) The theory of games with asymmetrical information shows that the right incentives allow hosts to screen-out parasites and screen-in mutualists, explaining successful partner choice in the absence of signalling. Applications range from ant-plants to microbiomes. (2) Contract theory distinguishes two longstanding but weakly differentiated explanations of host response to defectors: host sanctions and partner fidelity feedback. Host traits that selectively punish misbehaving symbionts are parsimoniously interpreted as pre-adaptations. Yucca-moth and legume-rhizobia mutualisms are argued to be examples of partner fidelity feedback. (3) The theory of public goods shows that cooperation in multi-player interactions can evolve in the absence of assortment, in one-shot social dilemmas among non-kin. Applications include alarm calls in vertebrates and exoenzymes in microbes.

161 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recognizing that sanctions likely evolved for functions other than retaliation against cheaters offers many insights about mutualism coevolution, and about why mutualism evolves in only some lineages of potential hosts.
Abstract: How cooperation originates and persists in diverse species, from bacteria to multicellular organisms to human societies, is a major question in evolutionary biology. A large literature asks: what prevents selection for cheating within cooperative lineages? In mutualisms, or cooperative interactions between species, feedback between partners often aligns their fitness interests, such that cooperative symbionts receive more benefits from their hosts than uncooperative symbionts. But how do these feedbacks evolve? Cheaters might invade symbiont populations and select for hosts that preferentially reward or associate with cooperators (often termed sanctions or partner choice); hosts might adapt to variation in symbiont quality that does not amount to cheating (e.g., environmental variation); or conditional host responses might exist before cheaters do, making mutualisms stable from the outset. I review evidence from yucca-yucca moth, fig-fig wasp, and legume-rhizobium mutualisms, which are commonly cited as mutualisms stabilized by sanctions. Based on the empirical evidence, it is doubtful that cheaters select for host sanctions in these systems; cheaters are too uncommon. Recognizing that sanctions likely evolved for functions other than retaliation against cheaters offers many insights about mutualism coevolution, and about why mutualism evolves in only some lineages of potential hosts.

128 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The development of the cheating concept is described and a relative-fitness-based definition of cheating is distill that encapsulates the evolutionary threat posed by cheating, i.e. that cheaters will spread and erode the benefits of mutualism.
Abstract: Cheating is a focal concept in the study of mutualism, with the majority of researchers considering cheating to be both prevalent and highly damaging. However, current definitions of cheating do not reliably capture the evolutionary threat that has been a central motivation for the study of cheating. We describe the development of the cheating concept and distill a relative-fitness-based definition of cheating that encapsulates the evolutionary threat posed by cheating, i.e. that cheaters will spread and erode the benefits of mutualism. We then describe experiments required to conclude that cheating is occurring and to quantify fitness conflict more generally. Next, we discuss how our definition and methods can generate comparability and integration of theory and experiments, which are currently divided by their respective prioritisations of fitness consequences and traits. To evaluate the current empirical evidence for cheating, we review the literature on several of the best-studied mutualisms. We find that although there are numerous observations of low-quality partners, there is currently very little support from fitness data that any of these meet our criteria to be considered cheaters. Finally, we highlight future directions for research on conflict in mutualisms, including novel research avenues opened by a relative-fitness-based definition of cheating.

125 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The economic theory of employment contracts is used to formulate and distinguish between two mechanisms that have been proposed to prevent cheating in host–symbiont mutualisms, partner fidelity feedback (PFF) and host sanctions (HS).
Abstract: Although mutualisms are common in all ecological communities and have played key roles in the diversification of life, our current understanding of the evolution of cooperation applies mostly to social behavior within a species. A central question is whether mutualisms persist because hosts have evolved costly punishment of cheaters. Here, we use the economic theory of employment contracts to formulate and distinguish between two mechanisms that have been proposed to prevent cheating in host–symbiont mutualisms, partner fidelity feedback (PFF) and host sanctions (HS). Under PFF, positive feedback between host fitness and symbiont fitness is sufficient to prevent cheating; in contrast, HS posits the necessity of costly punishment to maintain mutualism. A coevolutionary model of mutualism finds that HS are unlikely to evolve de novo, and published data on legume–rhizobia and yucca–moth mutualisms are consistent with PFF and not with HS. Thus, in systems considered to be textbook cases of HS, we find poor support for the theory that hosts have evolved to punish cheating symbionts; instead, we show that even horizontally transmitted mutualisms can be stabilized via PFF. PFF theory may place previously underappreciated constraints on the evolution of mutualism and explain why punishment is far from ubiquitous in nature.

109 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: FastTree as mentioned in this paper uses sequence profiles of internal nodes in the tree to implement neighbor-joining and uses heuristics to quickly identify candidate joins, then uses nearest-neighbor interchanges to reduce the length of the tree.
Abstract: Gene families are growing rapidly, but standard methods for inferring phylogenies do not scale to alignments with over 10,000 sequences. We present FastTree, a method for constructing large phylogenies and for estimating their reliability. Instead of storing a distance matrix, FastTree stores sequence profiles of internal nodes in the tree. FastTree uses these profiles to implement neighbor-joining and uses heuristics to quickly identify candidate joins. FastTree then uses nearest-neighbor interchanges to reduce the length of the tree. For an alignment with N sequences, L sites, and a different characters, a distance matrix requires O(N^2) space and O(N^2 L) time, but FastTree requires just O( NLa + N sqrt(N) ) memory and O( N sqrt(N) log(N) L a ) time. To estimate the tree's reliability, FastTree uses local bootstrapping, which gives another 100-fold speedup over a distance matrix. For example, FastTree computed a tree and support values for 158,022 distinct 16S ribosomal RNAs in 17 hours and 2.4 gigabytes of memory. Just computing pairwise Jukes-Cantor distances and storing them, without inferring a tree or bootstrapping, would require 17 hours and 50 gigabytes of memory. In simulations, FastTree was slightly more accurate than neighbor joining, BIONJ, or FastME; on genuine alignments, FastTree's topologies had higher likelihoods. FastTree is available at http://microbesonline.org/fasttree.

2,436 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2009
TL;DR: In this article, the effects of cross-fertilisation and self fertilization on the production of seeds are discussed. But the main difference between cross-and self-flowered plants is the height and weights of the crossed and self-flowering plants.
Abstract: 1. Introductory remarks 2. Convolvulacaea 2. Scrophulariaceae, Gesneriaceae, Labiatae, etc. 4. Cruciferae, Papaveraceae, Resedaceae, etc. 5. Geraniaceae, Leguminosae, Onagraceae, etc. 6. Solanaceae, Primulaceae, Polygoneae, etc. 7. Summary of the heights and weights of the crossed and self-fertilised plants 8. Difference between crossed and self-fertilised plants in constitutional vigour and in other respects 9. The effects of cross-fertilisation and self-fertilisation on the production of seeds 10. Means of fertilisation 11. The habits of insects in relation to the fertilisation of flowers 12. General results Index.

1,224 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that the plant can modulate its microbiota to dynamically adjust to its environment and to better understand the level of plant dependence on the microbiotic components, the core microbiota need to be determined at different hierarchical scales of ecology while pan-microbiome analyses would improve characterization of the functions displayed.
Abstract: Plants can no longer be considered as standalone entities and a more holistic perception is needed. Indeed, plants harbor a wide diversity of microorganisms both inside and outside their tissues, in the endosphere and ectosphere, respectively. These microorganisms, which mostly belong to Bacteria and Fungi, are involved in major functions such as plant nutrition and plant resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses. Hence, the microbiota impact plant growth and survival, two key components of fitness. Plant fitness is therefore a consequence of the plant per se and its microbiota, which collectively form a holobiont. Complementary to the reductionist perception of evolutionary pressures acting on plant or symbiotic compartments, the plant holobiont concept requires a novel perception of evolution. The interlinkages between the plant holobiont components are explored here in the light of current ecological and evolutionary theories. Microbiome complexity and the rules of microbiotic community assemblage are not yet fully understood. It is suggested that the plant can modulate its microbiota to dynamically adjust to its environment. To better understand the level of plant dependence on the microbiotic components, the core microbiota need to be determined at different hierarchical scales of ecology while pan-microbiome analyses would improve characterization of the functions displayed.

1,199 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The conceptual and evidence-based foundation provided in this essay is expected to serve as a roadmap for hypothesis-driven, experimentally validated research on holobionts and their hologenomes, thereby catalyzing the continued fusion of biology's subdisciplines.
Abstract: Groundbreaking research on the universality and diversity of microorganisms is now challenging the life sciences to upgrade fundamental theories that once seemed untouchable. To fully appreciate the change that the field is now undergoing, one has to place the epochs and foundational principles of Darwin, Mendel, and the modern synthesis in light of the current advances that are enabling a new vision for the central importance of microbiology. Animals and plants are no longer heralded as autonomous entities but rather as biomolecular networks composed of the host plus its associated microbes, i.e., "holobionts." As such, their collective genomes forge a "hologenome," and models of animal and plant biology that do not account for these intergenomic associations are incomplete. Here, we integrate these concepts into historical and contemporary visions of biology and summarize a predictive and refutable framework for their evaluation. Specifically, we present ten principles that clarify and append what these concepts are and are not, explain how they both support and extend existing theory in the life sciences, and discuss their potential ramifications for the multifaceted approaches of zoology and botany. We anticipate that the conceptual and evidence-based foundation provided in this essay will serve as a roadmap for hypothesis-driven, experimentally validated research on holobionts and their hologenomes, thereby catalyzing the continued fusion of biology's subdisciplines. At a time when symbiotic microbes are recognized as fundamental to all aspects of animal and plant biology, the holobiont and hologenome concepts afford a holistic view of biological complexity that is consistent with the generally reductionist approaches of biology.

817 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The scientific books will also be the best reason to choose, especially for the students, teachers, doctors, businessman, and other professions who are fond of reading.
Abstract: In what case do you like reading so much? What about the type of the complex population dynamics a theoretical empirical synthesis book? The needs to read? Well, everybody has their own reason why should read some books. Mostly, it will relate to their necessity to get knowledge from the book and want to read just to get entertainment. Novels, story book, and other entertaining books become so popular this day. Besides, the scientific books will also be the best reason to choose, especially for the students, teachers, doctors, businessman, and other professions who are fond of reading.

627 citations