Microevolutionary Processes in Plant-Microbe Symbiosis

  • Igor A. TikhonovichEmail author
  • Evgeny E. Andronov
  • Nikolai A. Provorov


The legacy of N.V. Timofeev-Ressovsky is a multifaceted phenomenon comprising numerous evolutionary problems. The long-term interest of Timofeev-Ressovsky in the effect of the radiation on the heredity probably had drown his attention to a more profound and extensive problem of microevolutionary processes, which in contrast to macroevolution may be not only clearly detected but even viewed literally “in the real time” mode. One can only regret that Timofeev-Ressovsky didn’t live long enough to see how his own predictions brightly reflected in the modern evolutionary symbiogenetics. The broadest spectra of evolutionary problems related to symbiosis—including the origin of eukaryotic cell and the permanent coevolutionary “fine-tuning” of symbiotic systems formed by bacteria and plants in the nitrogen-fixing symbiosis give a wealth of experimental data and clearly demonstrate the validity of his predictions. In this short paper we have tried to show the most obvious and bright connections between Timofeev-Ressovsky’s ideas in the area of the microevolutionary processes and current knowledge on the legume-rhizobial symbiosis.


Evolution Microevolution Coevolution Adaptation Symbiosis Nitrogen fixation Mutation Plant receptors Nod factor 



The work was supported by Russian Science Foundation (Grant No 14-24-00135, 2014–2016).


  1. Andronov EE, Onishchuk OP, Kurchak ON, Provorov NA (2014) Population structure of the clover rhizobia Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii upon transition from soil into the nodular niche. Microbiology 83(4):500–510 (Russian)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. De Weert S, Dekkers LC, Kuiper I et al (2004) Generation of enhanced competitive root-tip-colonizing Pseudomonas bacteria through accelerated evolution. J Bacteriol 186(10):3153–3159CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. FAO CFS-HLPE Report #3 (2012) “Food security and climate change”. A report by the high level panel of experts on food security and nutrition, Rome, Italy, p 102Google Scholar
  4. Flor HH (1956) The complementary genic systems in flax and flax rust. Advan Genet 8:29–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Govorov LI (1928) The peas of Afghanistan. Bull Appl Bot Genet Plant-Breed 19(2):497–522 (Russian)Google Scholar
  6. Krasil’nikov NA, Melkumova TA (1963) Nodule bacteria variability inside the nodules of legume plants. Proc Ac Sci USSR 5:693–706 (Russian)Google Scholar
  7. Margulis L, Bermudes D (1985) Symbiosis as a mechanism of evolution: status of cell symbiosis theory. Symbiosis 1:101–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Muntyan AN, Andronov EE, Belova VS et al (2012) Linked symbiotic populations part I: analysis of the genetic diversity of the rhizobial component. Russ J Genet: Appl Res 10(1):3–11 (Russian)Google Scholar
  9. Muntyan VS, Cherkasova ME, Andronov EE et al (2016) Prevalence of “islands” in genomes of Sinorhizobium meliloti native isolates. Russ J Genet in press (Russian)Google Scholar
  10. Osipova MA, Mortier V, Demchenko KN et al (2012) Wuschel-related homeobox5 gene expression and interaction of CLE peptides with components of the systemic control add two pieces to the puzzle of autoregulation of nodulation. Plant Physiol 158(3):1329–1341CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Pershina EV, Dolnik AS, Tamazyan GS et al (2014) The Evolutionary space model to be used for the metagenomic analysis of molecular and adaptive evolution in the bacterial communities. (Book Chapter) In: Evolutionary biology: genome evolution, speciation, coevolution and origin of life. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 339–355Google Scholar
  12. Porozov YuB, Muntyan AN, Chizhevskaja EP et al (2012) Conjugate symbiotic populations part II: analysis of nfr5 receptor gene polymorphisms using molecular docking. Russ J Genet Appl Res 10(1):12–18 (Russian)Google Scholar
  13. Provorov NA, Vorobyov NI (2010) Evolutionary genetics of plant-microbe symbioses Tikhonovichs IA (ed). NOVA Science Publishers, NY, p 290Google Scholar
  14. Provorov NA, Tsyganova AV, Brewin NJ et al (2012) Evolution of symbiotic bacteria within the extra- and intra-cellular plant compartments: experimental evidence and mathematical simulation (mini-review). Symbiosis 58(1–3):39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Razumovskaya ZG (1937) Nodule formation in various pea cultivars. Russ J Microbiol 6(3):321–328 (Russian)Google Scholar
  16. Tikhonovich IA, Provorov NA (2009) From plant-microbe interactions to symbiogenetics: a universal paradigm for the inter-species genetic integration. Ann Appl Biol 154(3):341–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Timofeev-Ressovsky NV (2009) Genetics, evolution and methodology of natural sciences. Lectures delivered in Sverdlovsk in 1964. Tokmas-Press, Ekaterinburg, p 240 (Russian)Google Scholar
  18. Timofeev-Ressovsky NV, Vorontsov NN, Yablokov AV (1977) Brief draft on the evolutionary theory. Nauka Publ Moscow, p 302 (Russian)Google Scholar
  19. Zhukov V, Radutoiu S, Madsen LH et al (2008) The pea Sym37 receptor kinase gene controls infection-thread initiation and nodule development. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 21(12):1600–1608CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor A. Tikhonovich
    • 1
    Email author
  • Evgeny E. Andronov
    • 1
  • Nikolai A. Provorov
    • 1
  1. 1.All-Russia Research Institute for Agricultural MicrobiologySt. Petersburg, PushkinRussia

Personalised recommendations