The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cospeciation vs host‐shift speciation: methods for testing, evidence from natural associations and relation to coevolution
Abstract
Summary: Hosts and their symbionts are involved in intimate physiological and ecological interactions. The impact of these interactions on the evolution of each partner depends on the time‐scale considered. Short‐term dynamics – ‘coevolution’ in the narrow sense – has been reviewed elsewhere. We focus here on the long‐term evolutionary dynamics of cospeciation and speciation following host shifts. Whether hosts and their symbionts speciate in parallel, by cospeciation, or through host shifts, is a key issue in host–symbiont evolution. In this review, we first outline approaches to compare divergence between pairwise associated groups of species, their advantages and pitfalls. We then consider recent insights into the long‐term evolution of host–parasite and host–mutualist associations by critically reviewing the literature. We show that convincing cases of cospeciation are rare (7%) and that cophylogenetic methods overestimate the occurrence of such events. Finally, we examine the relationships between short‐term coevolutionary dynamics and long‐term patterns of diversification in host–symbiont associations. We review theoretical and experimental studies showing that short‐term dynamics can foster parasite specialization, but that these events can occur following host shifts and do not necessarily involve cospeciation. Overall, there is now substantial evidence to suggest that coevolutionary dynamics of hosts and parasites do not favor long‐term cospeciation. ContentsSummary347I.Introduction348II.Origin of the cospeciation concept349III.Theoretical framework and methods for testing for cospeciation349IV.Studies of natural associations reveal the prevalence of host shifts355V.Relationship between host–symbiont coevolution and symbiont speciation378VI.Conclusion381Acknowledgements381References381Glossary379
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Phylogenies and the Comparative Method
Felsenstein, J. (1985) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284325 · Cited by 9,793
Agosta, S. J., Janz, N., & Brooks, D. R. (2010) · Zoologia (Curitiba) · doi:10.1590/s1984-46702010000200001 · Cited by 316
Cross-Species Pathogen Transmission and Disease Emergence in Primates
Pedersen, A. B., & Davies, T. J. (2009) · EcoHealth · doi:10.1007/s10393-010-0284-3 · Cited by 142
Cited by
The evolutionary history of vertebrate RNA viruses
Shi, M., Lin, X.-D., Chen, X., Tian, J.-H., Chen, L.-J., Li, K., Wang, W., Eden, J.-S., Shen, J.-J., Liu, L., et al. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0012-7 · Cited by 774
The human microbiome in evolution
Davenport, E. R., Sanders, J. G., Song, S. J., Amato, K. R., Clark, A. G., & Knight, R. (2017) · BMC Biology · doi:10.1186/s12915-017-0454-7 · Cited by 393
Testing for coevolutionary diversification: linking pattern with process
Althoff, D. M., Segraves, K. A., & Johnson, M. T. J. (2014) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2013.11.003 · Cited by 176
Dainese, M., Isaac, N. J. B., Powney, G. D., Bommarco, R., Öckinger, E., Kuussaari, M., Pöyry, J., Benton, T. G., Gabriel, D., Hodgson, J. A., et al. (2017) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.13601 · Cited by 38
Independent origins of the feather lice (Insecta:Degeeriella) of raptors: Raptor Lice Phylogeny
Catanach, T. A., & Johnson, K. P. (2015) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/bij.12453 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- de Vienne, D. M., Refrégier, G., López‐Villavicencio, M., Tellier, A., Hood, M. E., & Giraud, T.
- Venue
- New Phytologist
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-02-25
- Volume
- 198
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 347-385
- ISSN
- 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8137
- OpenAlex
- W2171695241
- Cited by
- 464
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 25.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cospeciation vs host‐shift speciation: methods for testing, evidence from natural associations and relation to coevolution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/nph.12150
- The paper
- de Vienne, D. M., Refrégier, G., López‐Villavicencio, M., Tellier, A., Hood, M. E., & Giraud, T. (2013). Cospeciation vs host‐shift speciation: methods for testing, evidence from natural associations and relation to coevolution. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12150
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.