ArticleHeredity2020
Endosymbiont diversity in natural populations of Tetranychus mites is rapidly lost under laboratory conditions.
Article in Heredity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Host-Associated Bacterial Community Changes After Laboratory Introduction Vary With Wolbachia Presence.Environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- The Microbiome of an Invasive Spider: Reduced Bacterial Richness, but no Indication of Microbial-Mediated Dispersal Behaviour.Microbial ecology · 2025Article
- Reciprocal Host-Evolutionary applications · 2025Article
- A Sex-Specific Trade-Off Between Pesticide Resistance and Tolerance to Heat-Induced Sterility inEvolutionary applications · 2024Article
- Egg provisioning explains the penetrance of symbiont-mediated sex allocation distortion in haplodiploids.Heredity · 2023Article
- Interacting host modifier systems controlEvolution letters · 2022Article
- Wolbachia and Spiroplasma could influence bacterial communities of the spider mite Tetranychus truncatus.Experimental & applied acarology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the diversity of bacterial endosymbionts in arthropods is well documented, whether and how such diversity is maintained remains an open question. We investigated the temporal changes occurring in the prevalence and composition of endosymbionts after transferring natural populations of Tetranychus spider mites from the field to the laboratory. These populations, belonging to three different Tetranychus species (T. urticae, T. ludeni and T. evansi) carried variable infection frequencies of Wolbachia, Cardinium, and Rickettsia. We report a rapid change of the infection status of these populations after only 6 months of laboratory rearing, with an apparent loss of Rickettsia and Cardinium, while Wolbachia apparently either reached fixation or was lost. We show that Wolbachia had variable effects on host longevity and fecundity, and induced variable levels of cytoplasmic incompatibility (CI) in each fully infected population, despite no sequence divergence in the markers used and full CI rescue between all populations. This suggests that such effects are largely dependent upon the host genotype. Subsequently, we used these data to parameterize a theoretical model for the invasion of CI-inducing symbionts in haplodiploids, which shows that symbiont effects are sufficient to explain their dynamics in the laboratory. This further suggests that symbiont diversity and prevalence in the field are likely maintained by environmental heterogeneity, which is reduced in the laboratory. Overall, this study highlights the lability of endosymbiont infections and draws attention to the limitations of laboratory studies to understand host-symbiont interactions in natural populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.