Superinfection exclusion: a viral strategy with short-term benefits and long-term drawbacks

Viral superinfection occurs when multiple viral particles subsequently infect the same host. In nature, several viral species are found to have evolved diverse mechanisms to prevent superinfection (superinfection exclusion) but how this strategic choice impacts the fate of mutations in the viral population remains unclear. Using stochastic simulations, we find that genetic drift is suppressed when superinfection occurs, thus facilitating the fixation of beneficial mutations and the removal of deleterious ones. Interestingly, we also find that the competitive (dis)advantage associated with variations in life history parameters is not necessarily captured by the viral growth rate for either infection strategy. Putting these together, we then show that a mutant with superinfection exclusion will easily overtake a superinfecting population even if the latter has a much higher growth rate. Our findings suggest that while superinfection exclusion can negatively impact the long-term adaptation of a viral population, in the short-term it is ultimately a winning strategy. Author summary Viral social behaviour has recently been receiving increasing attention in the context of ecological and evolutionary dynamics of viral populations. One fascinating and still relatively poorly understood example is superinfection or co-infection, which occur when multiple viruses infect the same host. Among bacteriophages, a wide range of mechanisms have been discovered that enable phage to prevent superinfection (superinfection exclusion) even at the cost of using precious resources for this purpose. What is the evolutionary impact of this strategic choice and why do so many phages exhibit this behaviour? Here, we conduct an extensive simulation study of a phage population to address this question. In particular, we investigate the fate of viral mutations arising in an environment with a constant supply of bacterial hosts designed to mimic a “turbidostat,” as these are increasingly being used in laboratory evolution experiments. Our results show that allowing superinfection in the long-term yields a population which is more capable of adapting to changes in the environment. However, when in direct competition, mutants capable of preventing superinfection experience a very large advantage over their superinfecting counterparts, even if this ability comes at a significant cost to their growth rate. This indicates that while preventing superinfection can negatively impact the long-term prospects of a viral population, in the short-term it is ultimately a winning strategy.