Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30417109›Full record

ArticlemSystems

Is Host Filtering the Main Driver of Phylosymbiosis across the Tree of Life?

Florent Mazel, Katherine M Davis, Andrew Loudon, Waldan K Kwong, Mathieu Groussin, Laura Wegener Parfrey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSystems. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

101 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 212 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Florent MazelDepartment of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0572-9901
Katherine M DavisDepartment of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Andrew LoudonBiodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Waldan K KwongDepartment of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Mathieu Groussin *Center for Microbiome Informatics and Therapeutics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0942-7217
Laura Wegener Parfrey *Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
University of British Columbia · CAMassachusetts Institute of Technology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Host-associated microbiota composition can be conserved over evolutionary time scales. Indeed, closely related species often host similar microbiota; i.e., the composition of their microbiota harbors a phylogenetic signal, a pattern sometimes referred to as "phylosymbiosis." Elucidating the origins of this pattern is important to better understand microbiota ecology and evolution. However, this is hampered by our lack of theoretical expectations and a comprehensive overview of phylosymbiosis prevalence in nature. Here, we use simulations to provide a simple expectation for when we should expect this pattern to occur and then review the literature to document the prevalence and strength of phylosymbiosis across the host tree of life. We demonstrate that phylosymbiosis can readily emerge from a simple ecological filtering process, whereby a given host trait (e.g., gut pH) that varies with host phylogeny (i.e., harbors a phylogenetic signal) filters preadapted microbes. We found marked differences between methods used to detect phylosymbiosis, so we proposed a series of practical recommendations based on using multiple best-performing approaches. Importantly, we found that, while the prevalence of phylosymbiosis is mixed in nature, it appears to be stronger for microbiotas living in internal host compartments (e.g., the gut) than those living in external compartments (e.g., the rhizosphere). We show that phylosymbiosis can theoretically emerge without any intimate, long-term coevolutionary mechanisms and that most phylosymbiosis patterns observed in nature are compatible with a simple ecological process. Deviations from baseline ecological expectations might be used to further explore more complex hypotheses, such as codiversification.

Indexed as

endospheregut microbiomeholobiontmacroevolutionplant microbiomerhizosphere

Identifiers

PMID30417109
PMCPMC6208643
OpenAlexW2899207657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.