Adaptation, an ecological perspective

Organisms have to cope in situations that involve complex and several relationships with other organisms. Others have liken this to a fighting jet, changing its defenses, while under attack from several enemies. Suffice it to say some organisms have evolved relationships resembling shaky truces. Others have engaged in a race where new favorable mutations can sometimes give one species a survival edge, however temporary.

We fail often to realize just how important and persuasive this "biological" component of our environment is.

Important Example: Current theory on Pre-eclampsia

One of the most important co evolutionary relationships that occur actually involve parents and young.

"Pregnancy can be the most wonderful experience life has to offer. But it can also be dangerous. Around the world, an estimated 529,000 women a year die during pregnancy or childbirth. Ten million suffer injuries, infection or disability."

One of the potential problems encountered is the threat of pre-eclampsia (preeclampsia).

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/14/health/silent-struggle-a-new-theory-of-pregnancy.html

In pre-eclampsia there is a sudden rise in a pregnant woman’s blood pressure, usually diagnosed during the 20th week, accompanied by increased protein in her urine and swollen hands and face. It can also affect her brain, liver, and kidneys. Until the pregnant person’s blood pressure reduces, they are at a greater risk of stroke, severe bleeding, separation of the placenta from the uterus, and seizures. The condition affects around 5 percent of pregnancies and is a leading cause of pregnancy- and birth-related deaths.

The basic theory: .

"Dr. Haig proposed that pre-eclampsia was just an extreme form of a strategy used by all fetuses. The fetuses somehow raised the blood pressure of their mothers so as to drive more blood into the relatively low-pressure placenta. Dr. Haig suggested that pre-eclampsia would be associated with some substance that fetuses injected into their mothers' bloodstreams. Pre-eclampsia happened when fetuses injected too much of the stuff, perhaps if they were having trouble getting enough nourishment."

It is based on the work of Robert Trivers . Dr. Trivers argued that natural selection should favor parents who can successfully raise the most offspring. For that strategy to work, they can't put too many resources into any one child. But the child's chances for reproductive success will increase as its care from parents increase.

The theory incorporates ecological theory on reproductive effort, seen as a set box of resources, whose contents can be distributed piecemeal or all at once. To one child or to many.

Example: Struggle easily visioned between fledging birds and parents.

Basic evidence for theory

Production of excessive antiangiogenic (blood vessel) factors have been found in women experiencing pre-eclampsia. The first factor identified was sFit-1. Excessive placental production of antiangiogenic factors such as Flt-1 and sEng, are liberated into the maternal circulation inducing the clinical syndrome. Pre-eclamptic placentas show over expression of sFlt-1 and sEng. Their levels are increased in the serum of preeclamptic women weeks before the appearance of overt clinical manifestations of the disease and they correlate with disease severity (Levine et al.2006b).

The basic theory has been modified through time.

Example. A study following 750,000 live births in the Danish National Patient Registry and all registered medical diagnoses for up to 30 years after birth. Offspring exposed to pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) in trimester 1 had significantly reduced overall later-life disease risks, but increased risks when PIH exposure started or developed as preeclampsia in later trimesters. Similar patterns were found for first-year mortality.

These results suggest that early PIH leading to improved postpartum survival and health represents a balanced compromise between the reproductive interests of parents and offspring, whereas later onset of PIH may reflect an unbalanced parent-offspring conflict at the detriment of maternal and offspring health.

Citation: Hollegaard B, Byars SG, Lykke J, Boomsma JJ (2013) Parent-Offspring Conflict and the Persistence of Pregnancy-Induced Hypertension-Paper link

Other evidence.

There are other genes involved: One of the most striking examples is a gene called insulin growth factor 2 (Igf2). Produced only in fetal cells, it stimulates rapid growth.

Normally, only the father's copy is active. To understand the gene's function, scientists disabled the father's copy in the placenta of fetal mice. The mice were born weighing 40 percent below average. Perhaps the mother's copy of Igf2 is usually silent because turning it off helps regulate normal growth of a fetus.


On the other hand, mice carry another gene called Igf2r that interferes with the growth-spurring activity of Igf2. This may be another maternal defense gene. In the case of Igf2r, it is the father's gene that is silent, perhaps initially evolved as a way for fathers to speed up the growth of their offspring. If the mother's copy of this second gene is disabled, mouse pups are born 125 percent heavier than average.

The action of these genes brings to the discussion, conflicts between a father and mother's interest. This conflict is not as important as the conflict between a mother and child for this disease, but still significant.

In evolutionary theory, the conflict between parents is very important, as it is one of major causative factors postulated for the large number of imprinting genes found in some groups.

Some interesting new research links this condition to immune differences between mother/ father and mother / child.

from:Sandovici, I et al. The Imprinted Igf2-Igf2r Axis is Critical for Matching Placental Microvasculature Expansion to Fetal Growth. Developmental Cell; 10 Jan 2022: DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2021.12.005 and
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/battle-of-the-sexes-begins-in-womb-as-father-and-mothers-genes-tussle-over-nutrition

“The study suggests that maternal-fetal sharing of HLA alleles increases the likelihood of pre-eclampsia, and that these associations depend on the level of exposure to the paternal seminal fluid prior to pregnancy.

For mothers who have low cumulative exposure to paternal seminal fluid prior to pregnancy, increased sharing of Class 1 alleles increases the likelihood of preeclampsia over 4-fold.”

Prof. Triche says that the underlying biology of these findings appear to link to the way the mother’s immune system views the “foreign genes,” first when they are introduced by the father’s sperm and then in the fetus.

from http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/ng.3895

Dr. Morgan and colleagues carried out a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 4,380 children born to mothers who developed preeclampsia during pregnancy, and of 310,238 whose mothers did not develop the condition (the controls). These studies rapidly scan the genomes or complete sets of DNA of large numbers of people to find variants in the genetic code that are linked to particular diseases They identified two previously unknown DNA variants that were significantly linked to pre-eclampsia.

The authors note that the variants are quite common and occur in about half the population. However, they are not enough to cause pre-eclampsia on their own; they simply raise the risk.

For those interested in reading further, additional references. Reference one. ---------------Reference two

 

The greater interest for this course is in relationship between a pathogen/parasite and its host.

The formal study of what is now known as co-evolution, focused initially on competitive relationships and then predation-prey relationships. To examine the evolutionary interactions between pathogens and parasites is a relatively new endeavor. http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_33

 

How do we study co-evolution?

1. Comparing phylogenies of very distantly related species that share an ecological relationship can determine if co-evolution. is involved. https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_46.

go

An example: Gophers and lice

go2rates

Basic theory as to the interaction between parasite/pathogens and hosts continues to be refined.

Early theory

The race is classically described as fitting the Red Queen hypothesis, which is a frequency dependent hypothesis. The two species affect each other in cycles that depend on numbers (and virulence in newer models). We expect as numbers of parasites increase, host numbers decrease and that leads to parasite numbers decreasing. Decreased parasite load leads to hosts increasing, especially if accompanied by new alleles which gain the host resistance to the parasite. Parasites however also have mutations that enable them to overcome host resistance and they then begin to increase, starting a new cycle. The advantage in this relationship is given to the parasites that have shorter generation times and so more probability for "overcoming resistance" mutations to arise. The hypothesis is named after the Red Queen, who in a popular fairy tale claims. “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. " (from Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass) The same place refers to survival and of course the running, selection of favorable mutations or recombination of such.

alice

However research has indicated, evidence of frequency dependent selection of traits or genes has been difficult to demonstrate for parasite-host interactions. This model has proved a better model for many predator prey interactions.

What followed was to focus on actual case studies in which the evolutionary history of pathogens or parasites is well known.

We have at best from this work some generalities. such as virulence decreases with age (length of the relationship through time) of the parasite-host relationship, and horizontal transfer favors increased virulence over vertical transfer. An example case study in bacteria.

On pathogens.

Pathogens have been the primary focus of this course. Prior studies have confirmed some "trends" but also raised some questions.

Serial transfer studies. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_passage) Be able to explain the graphs below.situation?

Attenuation studies:

Some results have caused some concern.

These resulsts were once thought due to the fact that in some serial passage as above, a pathogen is being transmitted from host to host regardless of its virulence. That is the pathogen is allowed to "evolve", the host not. This was not be expected to occur in a natural situation.

But a recent re-examination of one classic study indicates caution.

A classic study: Australian "rabbits" and an introduced virus.

In 1950, a single strain of myxoma virus of South American rabbits (Sylvilagus brasiliensis) was released in Australia as a biological control agent against introduced European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Frank Fenner, realizing this would be a grand experiment in virulence evolution, set in motion a series of experimental studies to monitor the subsequent evolution of viral virulence. These studies involved measuring the lethality of virus isolates taken from the field in standardized laboratory rabbits. The work showed that the original highly lethal strain, with a case fatality rate (CFR) of close to 100%, was rapidly replaced by strains with case fatality rates of 70–95% or lower, and sometimes even less than 50%. Fenner and colleagues then went on to show that a decrease in virulence was favored by natural selection because, by killing hosts too rapidly, highly virulent viruses had shorter infectious periods (and so decreased transmission) than less virulent strains, which did not kill so rapidly.

This work became the bedrock of the theory of virulence evolution developed in the 1980s. it remains so because of the combination of field sampling and controlled experimentation that demonstrated the relevant trade-offs between virulence and viral transmission/success. from https://www.pnas.org/content/114/35/9397

ra

gr

However, a newer study warns of new virulence in the virus at least based on 1990 samples. https://www.pnas.org/content/114/35/9397 This new work stresses that the evolutionary advantage, because of shorter generation time and larger populations size, again goes to the parasite or pathogen. It also introduces the possibility of problems that could arise when pathogens/parasites "escape" due to evolving strategies that drastically alter the host's immune system response.

Summary of reference, includes other "escapes"

We have then begun to study how changes in the environment have caused changes in parasite and so potentially pathogen response.

"Life history theory has been applied to the allocation of resources between the growth and transmission stages during the blood stage of malaria infections [4,12,13]. The optimal allocation of resources between growth and transmission stages may change in environments that increase the mortality of the parasite, such as after the generation of immunity during the course of an infection, or after drug treatment. At high levels of mortality, when extinction of the parasite is certain, the parasite should invest mainly in the transmission stage. At low levels of mortality, the parasite should increase allocation into the growth stage as this prevents clearance of the parasite. An interesting recent study by Reece et al. applied these ideas to drug treatment by proposing that the parasite should display adaptive phenotypic plasticity in response to the severity of the treatment . At high drug doses the parasite should increase investment in the transmission stage, consistent with earlier in vitro observations . At low drug doses the parasite should decrease investment in the transmission stage,. from Parasite Evolution and Life History Theory Beth F. Kochin et al., PLoS Biol 8(10): e1000524. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.100052"

Unfortunately such flexibility has led to a pattern of mosaic evolution that for the most part simply complicates the picture now, but may yield insights in the future. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_coevolution

What do we know now about the relationship between parasites and human hosts?

Very little because the reactions are complex, involve the innate immune system which has been little studied and relationships evolved so long ago.

Of the 223 identified parasitic origins, 186 (83%) occur at or below their present taxonomic rank of family and 113 (51%) occur at or below the level of genus. However, 90% of parasite species diversity occurs in the 10 largest parasitic clades, all of which appeared prior to the Mesozoic. https://s/10.1371/journal.ppat.1003250

co

What do we know about how parasites regulate the immune system? Part of the problem is that until recently all focus has been on the specific or adaptive immune response. Our responses to parasites involve evolutionary responses of the innate system to a large extent.

Some background on the immune system. You do not need to understand immunity in any depth, but realize there are two systems, they interact, and it is the less studied innate system that mounts the major response to parasites.

:http://www.biology.arizona.edu/immunology/tutorials/immunology/page3.html A summary but followed by good tutorials for those not having any introduction to the specific or adaptive immune response.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279396/

https://www.creative-diagnostics.com/innate-and-adaptive-immunity.htm best summary.

6

 

You do not have to know the specifics of the adaptive immune response. Just note that it is a response to specific pathogens, and the effectiveness of the response is enhanced by successive encounters with the pathogen. This is because clones of memory cells or cells that "recognize" and so can respond to the pathogen are created after that first encounter.

a

 

The response to worms involves both systems.

com

Just focus on the end results of the response in this diagram.

 

A key component of the immune system that has evolved to minimize the virulence of helminths is the type 2 (or TH2) response. Instead of giving us allergies and asthma, the type 2 response likely evolved both to provide resistance by limiting the number helminths that can live in our intestinal tract and to repair the tissue damage that is caused by the helminths that have colonized our tissues. It appears the immune system in general is ineffective in preventing worm colonization, but effective at preventing secondary infections and counteracting worm damage. Even eosinophils, which can secrete chemicals that can kill parasites directly, are only effective against certain life cycle stages of a few species. Note that these cells evolved well after major groups of parasites and so probably in response to other factors.

The response is characterized by the production of cytokines such as interleukin-4 (IL-4), IL-5, IL-9, and IL-13. Signaling through interleukins and other cytokines in intestinal epithelial cells promotes goblet cell differentiation and increases mucus production, as well as increases proliferation and turnover of these cells. This may help maintain the mucosal barrier and limit aberrant responses triggered by the gut bacteria. In fact, some researchers point out most of this response may have even evolved in response to maintaining a healthy relationship with various bacteria. The absence of this type 2 response during helminth infections in mice is often associated with lethal sepsis from compromised gut integrity and leakage of gut bacteria. Increased contraction of intestinal muscles and the activation and release of mast cell products that can increase fluid flow into the lumen may also help flush the worms out of the gut.

Other cells involved in tissue repair also are activated by cytokines such as macrophages,basophils, eosinophils, and mast cells which also produce more cytokines that amplify the response. Research to date has indicated that this response is important in regulating inflammation damage in prolonged infections and wound healing. Severe systemic stress, immunosuppression, or overwhelming microbial inoculation causes the immune system to mount a type 2 response to an infection normally controlled by type 1 immunity.

ti

Type one and two responses, both involve both the innate (nonspecific)and adaptive (specific )systems. Again focus on end results.

 

Overall, the prevailing pattern is that there are few commonalities between the genomes of independently evolved parasitic worms, with each parasite having undergone specific adaptations for their particular niche or host.

It also appears that antigenic variation of proteins (Think about what you learned about new variations in HIV-CoV-2 and other viri. ) is not a common method in helminths of avoiding the host immune system, and maintaining a chronic infection. Instead, the parasitic worms are using a range of different strategies; minimizing its exposure to the host immune system through encapsulation and other surface modifications, and manipulating the host immune system through secretions of immuno agents. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4413821/

So it is these manipulative chemicals that our immune system would target, unfortunately these are secreted well after the worms have colonized our tissues.

In summary, the worms have evolved to provide little for our immune system to respond to until after the worms have set up shop so to speak. Are we seeing more in the way of allergies and auto-immune diseases simply because humans no longer carry the parasite load they did previously or in other words the worms are gone? Probably not. The worms have evolved to regulate the system that minimizes their effects and initially may have been more effective in their expulsion. This system also mediates the effects of bad bacteria, involved in wound healing and cell turnover and comes into play later in chronic infections. It is a maintenance system that is making mistakes in what it attacks probably because of the different internal and external stress placed on our bodies due to modern life. Worms can help us regulate this system and right now they seem to be an easier fix than other choices. However we should not forget, a worm infection comes with associated costs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helminthic_therapy

Research focus has turned to looking at gut microfauna and responses to "stress" in general.