Click
here to close Hello! We notice that
you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Echinobase
and may cause the site to display incorrectly. We suggest using a
current version of Chrome,
FireFox,
or Safari.
PLoS One
2018 Jan 01;136:e0199764. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199764.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
Aggressive bodyguards are not always the best: Preferential interaction with more aggressive ant species reduces reproductive success of plant bearing extrafloral nectaries.
Melati BG
,
Leal LC
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Variation in partner species and frequency of interaction between species pairs are potential drivers of the net outcome of generalized mutualisms. In ant-plant mutualisms, the quality of defence provided by ants is related to ant aggressiveness. Hence, we hypothesize that the performance of plants bearing extrafloral nectaries will be higher when they interact more frequently with more aggressive ant species. We estimated ant aggressiveness in the field by observing their behaviour towards soil baits. Afterwards, we observed the frequency with which individuals from these ant species visited plants through an entire reproductive cycle. We measured the production and persistence of plants reproductive structures through this period and the total seed production. Increasing in the interaction frequency with highly aggressive ants reduced the number of floral buds and seeds produced. Increased visitation frequency by less aggressive ants increased the number of floral buds and seeds per branch. The inverse relationship between ant aggressiveness and seed production may be influenced by the costs imposed by different mutualistic partners. Thus, frequent interaction with highly aggressive ants may lead to a higher accumulation of costs through time, resulting in a negative net outcome for the plants. Our results bring new evidence highlighting the importance to incorporate temporal aspects in the study of mutualistic interactions. We suggests that the quality of mutualistic partners must be understood as a function of its per-interaction benefit and their cumulative costs to their partner over time, what puts in check our current classification regarding partner quality in mutualistic systems.
???displayArticle.pubmedLink???
29949639
???displayArticle.pmcLink???PMC6021078 ???displayArticle.link???PLoS One
Fig 1. Number of floral buds as a function of the proportion of ant visitation and ant aggressiveness.Number of floral buds produced per branch of the EFN-bearing plant Turnera subulata (Turneraceae) visited in variable frequency by ants differing in its aggressiveness degree. The main ant species attending the EFN’s in each plant (> 60% of the total observed visitation) was classified into three groups according to its aggressiveness towards soil baits: low (squares and continuous line; Pheidole sp. and Dorymyrmex piramicus), intermediate (rhomb and dashed line; Camponotus blandus) and high aggressiveness (circle and dotted line; Ectatomma bruneum. and Solenopsis sp.). Low aggressiveness: Intercept = 3.32, Estimate = -0.00003. Intermediate aggressiveness: Intercept = 1.65, Estimate = 3.61. High aggressiveness: Intercept = 7.95, Estimate = -6.56.
Fig 2. Number of seeds as a function of the proportion of ant visitation and ant aggressiveness.Number of seeds produced per branch of the EFN-bearing plant Turnera subulata (Turneraceae) visited in variable frequency by ants differing in its aggressiveness degree. The main ant species attending the EFN’s in each plant (> 60% of the total observed visitation) was classified into three groups according to its aggressiveness towards soil baits: low (squares and continuous line; Pheidole sp. and Dorymyrmex piramicus), intermediate (rhomb and dashed line; Camponotus blandus) and high aggressiveness (circle and dotted line; Ectatomma bruneum and Solenopsis sp.). Low aggressiveness: Intercept = 18.29, Estimate = 8.03. Intermediate aggressiveness: Intercept = 9.70, Estimate = 16.19. High aggressiveness: Intercept = 53.46, Estimate = -58.08).
Andersen,
Regulation of "momentary" diversity by dominant species in exceptionally rich ant communities of the Australian seasonal tropics.
1992, Pubmed
Andersen,
Regulation of "momentary" diversity by dominant species in exceptionally rich ant communities of the Australian seasonal tropics.
1992,
Pubmed
Andersen,
Meat ants as dominant members of Australian ant communities: an experimental test of their influence on the foraging success and forager abundance of other species.
1994,
Pubmed
Betts,
Pollinator recognition by a keystone tropical plant.
2015,
Pubmed
Bshary,
Image scoring and cooperation in a cleaner fish mutualism.
2006,
Pubmed
Chamberlain,
Density-mediated, context-dependent consumer-resource interactions between ants and extrafloral nectar plants.
2008,
Pubmed
Dutton,
Three's a Crowd: Trade-Offs between Attracting Pollinators and Ant Bodyguards with Nectar Rewards in Turnera.
2016,
Pubmed
Heil,
Extrafloral nectar at the plant-insect interface: a spotlight on chemical ecology, phenotypic plasticity, and food webs.
2015,
Pubmed
Jones,
Cheaters must prosper: reconciling theoretical and empirical perspectives on cheating in mutualism.
2015,
Pubmed
Jones,
The fundamental role of competition in the ecology and evolution of mutualisms.
2012,
Pubmed
Leal,
Decreasing water availability across the globe improves the effectiveness of protective ant-plant mutualisms: a meta-analysis.
2017,
Pubmed
,
Echinobase
Leal,
Myrmecochores can target high-quality disperser ants: variation in elaiosome traits and ant preferences for myrmecochorous Euphorbiaceae in Brazilian Caatinga.
2014,
Pubmed
Marazzi,
The diversity, ecology and evolution of extrafloral nectaries: current perspectives and future challenges.
2013,
Pubmed
Ness,
Integrating quality and quantity of mutualistic service to contrast ant species protecting Ferocactus wislizeni.
2006,
Pubmed
O'Dowd,
Foliar nectar production and ant activity on a neotropical tree, Ochroma pyramidale.
1979,
Pubmed
Palmer,
Enough is enough: the effects of symbiotic ant abundance on herbivory, growth, and reproduction in an African acacia.
2013,
Pubmed
Rudgers,
Behavioral mechanisms underlie an ant-plant mutualism.
2003,
Pubmed
Simms,
Partner choice in nitrogen-fixation mutualisms of legumes and rhizobia.
2002,
Pubmed
Stanton,
Interacting guilds: moving beyond the pairwise perspective on mutualisms.
2003,
Pubmed
