publication . Article . 2011

Differences in accumulation and virulence determine the outcome of competition during Tobacco etch virus coinfection.

Guillaume Lafforgue; Santiago F. Elena;
Open Access English
  • Published: 15 Mar 2011
Abstract
Understanding the evolution of virulence for RNA viruses is essential for developing appropriate control strategies. Although it has been usually assumed that virulence is a consequence of within-host replication of the parasite, viral strains may be highly virulent without experiencing large accumulation as a consequence of immunopathological host responses. Using two strains of Tobacco etch potyvirus (TEV) that show a negative relationship between virulence and accumulation rate, we first explored the evolution of virulence and fitness traits during simple and mixed infections. Short-term evolution experiments initiated with each strain independently confirmed...
Subjects
free text keywords: Parasite virulence, Experimental evolution, Local adaptation, Spore production, [SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio], Research Article, Biology, Computational Biology, Population Modeling, Infectious Disease Modeling, Systems Biology, Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Genetics, Microbiology, Virology, Emerging Viral Diseases, Viral Evolution, Population Biology, Theoretical Biology, Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, Complex Systems, Nonlinear Dynamics, Medicine, R, Science, Q, General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, General Medicine
31 references, page 1 of 3

1. Roossinck MJ (2003) Plant RNA virus evolution. Curr Op Microbiol 6: 406-409. [OpenAIRE]

2. Elena SF, Agudelo-Romero P, Carrasco P, Codo n˜er FM, Mart´ın S, et al. (2008) Experimental evolution of plant RNA viruses. Heredity 100: 478-483.

3. Jones JDG, Dangl JL (2006) The plant immune system. Nature 444: 323-329. [OpenAIRE]

4. Elena SF, Sanjua´n R (2007) Virus evolution: insights from an experimental approach. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 38: 27-52.

5. Read AF (1994) The evolution of virulence. Trends Microbiol 2: 73-76.

6. Lenski RE, May RM (1994) The evolution of virulence in parasites and pathogens: reconciliation between two competing hypotheses. J Theor Biol 169: 253-65. [OpenAIRE]

7. Ebert D, Bull JJ (2003) Challenging the tradeoff model for the evolution of virulence: is virulence management feasible? Trends Microbiol 11: 15-20.

8. Alizon S, Van Baalen M (2008) Transmission-virulence trade-offs in vectorborne diseases. Theor Pop Biol 74: 6-15.

9. Anderson RM, May RM (1982) Coevolution of hosts and parasites. Parasitology 85: 411-426.

10. Frank SA (1996) Models of parasite virulence. Q Rev Biol 71: 37-78.

11. Paga´n I, Alonso-Blanco C, Garc´ıa-Arenal F (2007) The relationship of withinhost multiplication and virulence in a plant-virus system. PLoS ONE 2: e786.

12. Stewart AD, Logsdon JM, Jr., Kelley SE (2005) An empirical study of the evolution of virulence under both horizontal and vertical transmission. Evolution 59: 730-739. [OpenAIRE]

13. Lipsitch M, Moxon ER (1997) Virulence and transmissibility of pathogens: what is the relationship? Trends Microbiol 5: 31-37. [OpenAIRE]

14. May RM, Nowak MA (1995) Coinfection and the evolution of parasite virulence. Proc R Soc B 261: 209-215.

15. Mosquera J, Adler FR (1998) Evolution of virulence: a unified framework for coinfection and superinfection. J Theor Biol 195: 293-313. [OpenAIRE]

31 references, page 1 of 3
Powered by OpenAIRE Research Graph
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue