Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Coevolution: A History of the Macroevolutionary Approach to Studying Host-Parasite Associations

Greg J. Klassen
The Journal of Parasitology
Vol. 78, No. 4 (Aug., 1992), pp. 573-587
DOI: 10.2307/3283532
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3283532
Page Count: 15
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Coevolution: A History of the Macroevolutionary Approach to Studying Host-Parasite Associations
Preview not available

Abstract

The year 1991 marked 100 yr of coevolution research. I have reviewed the first 90 yr of this history. Three chronological phases are apparent: recognition of predictable associations among hosts and their parasites; search for patterns of association and their underlying causes, emphasizing either correlated biogeographic patterns or correlated phylogenies; and development of objective and repeatable methodologies for reconstructing and interpreting these patterns of association. Von Ihering, an outspoken anti-Darwinian, was undoubtedly the first to recognize and make use of predictable host-parasite associations. Kellogg and Fahrenholz, however, had more profound influence on subsequent generations, but in different directions. Kellogg attempted to meld natural selection with speciation by isolation. He also considered host specificity a component of coevolution, important but variable. His work laid the foundation for future research concentrated on biogeographic interpretations of host-parasite relationships. This emphasis and Metcalf's failed attempts to provide adequate mechanisms for reconstructing phylogenies reduced the biogeographic approach to an empirical research program in the hands of Manter. Fahrenholz, on the other hand, exposed to a strong anti-Darwinian sentiment, emphasized the importance of strict host specificity. This led to Eichler's formulation of the first 3 revolutionary rules and the conclusion that host specificity was not a component but the cause of coevolution and ultimately the tautology inherent in the phylogenetic approach. All had to rely on 1 assumption, that host and parasite phylogenies were reflected in the taxonomic hierarchy. Hennig criticized this assumption and provided a method whereby phylogenies are reconstructed independently. Brooks melded this new phylogenetic method (cladistics) with an equally new biogeographic method (vicariance biogeography), providing the foundations for the modern macroevolutionary approach to studying host-parasite associations.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
573
    573
  • Thumbnail: Page 
574
    574
  • Thumbnail: Page 
575
    575
  • Thumbnail: Page 
576
    576
  • Thumbnail: Page 
577
    577
  • Thumbnail: Page 
578
    578
  • Thumbnail: Page 
579
    579
  • Thumbnail: Page 
580
    580
  • Thumbnail: Page 
581
    581
  • Thumbnail: Page 
582
    582
  • Thumbnail: Page 
583
    583
  • Thumbnail: Page 
584
    584
  • Thumbnail: Page 
585
    585
  • Thumbnail: Page 
586
    586
  • Thumbnail: Page 
587
    587