The evolution of plant-insect mutualisms

Mutualisms (cooperative interactions between species) have had a central role in the generation and maintenance of life on earth. Insects and plants are involved in diverse forms of mutualism. Here we review evolutionary features of three prominent insect-plant mutualisms: pollination, protection and seed dispersal. We focus on addressing five central phenomena: evolutionary origins and maintenance of mutualism; the evolution of mutualistic traits; the evolution of specialization and generalization; coevolutionary processes; and the existence of cheating. Several features uniting very diverse insect-plant mutualisms are identified and their evolutionary implications are discussed: the involvement of one mobile and one sedentary partner; natural selection on plant rewards; the existence of a continuum from specialization to generalization; and the ubiquity of cheating, particularly on the part of insects. Plant-insect mutualisms have apparently both arisen and been lost repeatedly. Many adaptive hypotheses have been proposed to explain these transitions, and it is unlikely that any one of them dominates across interactions differing so widely in natural history. Evolutionary theory has a potentially important, but as yet largely unfilled, role to play in explaining the origins, maintenance, breakdown and evolution of insect-plant mutualisms.     

Facultative mutualisms: A double‐edged sword for foundation species in the face of anthropogenic global change

Ecosystems worldwide depend on habitat‐forming foundation species that often facilitate themselves with increasing density and patch size, while also engaging in facultative mutualisms. Anthropogenic global change (e.g., climate change, eutrophication, overharvest, land‐use change), however, is causing rapid declines of foundation species‐structured ecosystems, often typified by sudden collapse. Although disruption of obligate mutualisms involving foundation species is known to precipitate collapse (e.g., coral bleaching), how facultative mutualisms (i.e., context‐dependent, nonbinding reciprocal interactions) affect ecosystem resilience is uncertain. Here, we synthesize recent advancements and combine these with model analyses supported by real‐world examples, to propose that facultative mutualisms may pose a double‐edged sword for foundation species. We suggest that by amplifying self‐facilitative feedbacks by foundation species, facultative mutualisms can increase foundation species’ resistance to stress from anthropogenic impact. Simultaneously, however, mutualism dependency can generate or exacerbate bistability, implying a potential for sudden collapse when the mutualism's buffering capacity is exceeded, while recovery requires conditions to improve beyond the initial collapse point (hysteresis). Thus, our work emphasizes the importance of acknowledging facultative mutualisms for conservation and restoration of foundation species‐structured ecosystems, but highlights the potential risk of relying on mutualisms in the face of global change. We argue that significant caveats remain regarding the determination of these feedbacks, and suggest empirical manipulation across stress gradients as a way forward to identify related nonlinear responses.     

Parasites of mutualisms

Cooperation invites cheating, and nowhere is this more apparent than when different species cooperate, known as mutualism. In almost all mutualisms studied, specialist parasites have been identified that purloin the benefits that one mutualist provides another. Explaining how parasites are kept from driving mutualisms extinct remains an unsolved problem because existing theories explaining the maintenance of cooperation do not apply to parasites of mutualisms. Nonetheless, these theories can be summarized in such a way as to suggest how mutualisms can persist in the face of parasites. (1) For cooperation to occur, the recipient of a benefit must reciprocate, and the recriprocated benefit must be captured by the initial giver or its offspring. (2) For cooperation to persist, the mutualism must be re-assembled each generation. Because most mutualisms are of the "by-product' type, broadly defined, the first condition is normally always fulfilled. Thus, the maintenance of mutualism usually requires enforcement of the second condition: reliable re-assembly. Hence, I argue that the persistence of mutualism is best understood by using theories of species coexistence, because each mutualist can be considered a resource for the other, and species coexistence theory explains how multiple taxa (e.g. parasites and mutualists) can stably partition a resource over multiple generations. This approach connects the study of mutualism to theories of population regulation and helps to identify key factors that have promoted the evolution, maintenance and breakdown of mutualism. I discuss how these ideas might apply to and be tested in ant-plant, fig-wasp and yucca-moth mutualisms.     

The exploitation of mutualisms

Mutualisms (interspecific cooperative interactions) are ubiquitously exploited by organisms that obtain the benefits mutualists offer, while delivering no benefits in return. The natural history of these exploiters is well-described, but relatively little effort has yet been devoted to analysing their ecological or evolutionary significance for mutualism. Exploitation is not a unitary phenomenon, but a set of loosely related phenomena: exploiters may follow mixed strategies or pure strategies at either the species or individual level, may or may not be derived from mutualists, and may or may not inflict significant costs on mutualisms. The evolutionary implications of these different forms of exploitation, especially the threats they pose to the stability of mutualism, have as yet been minimally explored. Studies of this issue are usually framed in terms of a "temptation to defect" that generates a destabilizing conflict of interest between partners. I argue that this idea is in fact rather inappropriate for interpreting most observed forms of exploitation in mutualisms. I suggest several alternative and testable ideas for how mutualism can persist in the face of exploitation.     

Ecological genomics of mutualism decline in nitrogen-fixing bacteria

Anthropogenic changes can influence mutualism evolution; however, the genomic regions underpinning mutualism that are most affected by environmental change are generally unknown, even in well-studied model mutualisms like the interaction between legumes and their nitrogen (N)-fixing rhizobia. Such genomic information can shed light on the agents and targets of selection maintaining cooperation in nature. We recently demonstrated that N-fertilization has caused an evolutionary decline in mutualistic partner quality in the rhizobia that form symbiosis with clover. Here, population genomic analyses of N-fertilized versus control rhizobium populations indicate that evolutionary differentiation at a key symbiosis gene region on the symbiotic plasmid (pSym) contributes to partner quality decline. Moreover, patterns of genetic variation at selected loci were consistent with recent positive selection within N-fertilized environments, suggesting that N-rich environments might select for less beneficial rhizobia. By studying the molecular population genomics of a natural bacterial population within a long-term ecological field experiment, we find that: (i) the N environment is indeed a potent selective force mediating mutualism evolution in this symbiosis, (ii) natural variation in rhizobium partner quality is mediated in part by key symbiosis genes on the symbiotic plasmid, and (iii) differentiation at selected genes occurred in the context of otherwise recombining genomes, resembling eukaryotic models of adaptation.     

Long‐term nitrogen addition causes the evolution of less‐cooperative mutualists

Human activities have altered the global nitrogen (N) cycle, and as a result, elevated N inputs are causing profound ecological changes in diverse ecosystems. The evolutionary consequences of this global change have been largely ignored even though elevated N inputs are predicted to cause mutualism breakdown and the evolution of decreased cooperation between resource mutualists. Using a long‐term (22 years) N‐addition experiment, we find that elevated N inputs have altered the legume–rhizobium mutualism (where rhizobial bacteria trade N in exchange for photosynthates from legumes), causing the evolution of less‐mutualistic rhizobia. Plants inoculated with rhizobium strains isolated from N‐fertilized treatments produced 17–30% less biomass and had reduced chlorophyll content compared to plants inoculated with strains from unfertilized control plots. Because the legume–rhizobium mutualism is the major contributor of naturally fixed N to terrestrial ecosystems, the evolution of less‐cooperative rhizobia may have important environmental consequences.     

Mutualism Disruption Threatens Global Plant Biodiversity: A Systematic Review

Background

As global environmental change accelerates, biodiversity losses can disrupt interspecific interactions. Extinctions of mutualist partners can create “widow” species, which may face reduced ecological fitness. Hypothetically, such mutualism disruptions could have cascading effects on biodiversity by causing additional species coextinctions. However, the scope of this problem – the magnitude of biodiversity that may lose mutualist partners and the consequences of these losses – remains unknown.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We conducted a systematic review and synthesis of data from a broad range of sources to estimate the threat posed by vertebrate extinctions to the global biodiversity of vertebrate-dispersed and -pollinated plants. Though enormous research gaps persist, our analysis identified Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and global oceanic islands as geographic regions at particular risk of disruption of these mutualisms; within these regions, percentages of plant species likely affected range from 2.1–4.5%. Widowed plants are likely to experience reproductive declines of 40–58%, potentially threatening their persistence in the context of other global change stresses.

Conclusions

Our systematic approach demonstrates that thousands of species may be impacted by disruption in one class of mutualisms, but extinctions will likely disrupt other mutualisms, as well. Although uncertainty is high, there is evidence that mutualism disruption directly threatens significant biodiversity in some geographic regions. Conservation measures with explicit focus on mutualistic functions could be necessary to bolster populations of widowed species and maintain ecosystem functions.     

Anthropogenic effects on interaction outcomes: examples from insect-microbial symbioses in forest and savanna ecosystems

The influence of humans on ecosystem dynamics has been, and continues to be, profound. Anthropogenic effects are expected to amplify as human populations continue to increase. Concern over these effects has given rise to a large number of studies focusing on impacts of human activities on individual species or on biotic community structure and composition. Lacking are studies on interactions, particularly mutualisms. Because of the role of mutualisms in ecosystem stability, such studies are critically needed if we are to begin to better understand and predict the responses of ecosystems to anthropogenic change. Most organisms are involved in at least one mutualism, and many in several. Mutualisms facilitate the ability of partners to exploit particular habitats and resources, and play a large role in determining ecological boundaries. When change disrupts, enhances, or introduces new organisms into a mutualism, the outcome and stability of the original partnership(s) is altered as are effects of the symbiosis on the community and ecosystem as a whole. In this paper, using examples from six microbe-insect mutualisms in forest and savanna settings, we showcase how varied and complex the responses of mutualisms can be to an equally varied set of anthropogenic influences. We also show how alterations of mutualisms may ramify throughout affected systems. We stress that researchers must be cognizant that many observed changes in the behaviors, abundances, and distributions of organisms due to human activities are likely to be mediated by mutualists which may alter predictions and actual outcomes in significant ways.     

Modelling nutritional mutualisms: challenges and opportunities for data integration

Nutritional mutualisms are ancient, widespread, and profoundly influential in biological communities and ecosystems. Although much is known about these interactions, comprehensive answers to fundamental questions, such as how resource availability and structured interactions influence mutualism persistence, are still lacking. Mathematical modelling of nutritional mutualisms has great potential to facilitate the search for comprehensive answers to these and other fundamental questions by connecting the physiological and genomic underpinnings of mutualisms with ecological and evolutionary processes. In particular, when integrated with empirical data, models enable understanding of underlying mechanisms and generalisation of principles beyond the particulars of a given system. Here, we demonstrate how mathematical models can be integrated with data to address questions of mutualism persistence at four biological scales: cell, individual, population, and community. We highlight select studies where data has been or could be integrated with models to either inform model structure or test model predictions. We also point out opportunities to increase model rigour through tighter integration with data, and describe areas in which data is urgently needed. We focus on plant‐microbe systems, for which a wealth of empirical data is available, but the principles and approaches can be generally applied to any nutritional mutualism.     

Macroevolutionary patterns in the origin of mutualisms involving ants

Ants are a diverse and abundant insect group that form mutualistic associations with a number of different organisms from fungi to insects and plants. Here, we use a phylogenetic approach to identify ecological factors that explain macroevolutionary trends in the mutualism between ants and honeydew-producing Homoptera. We also consider association between ant-Homoptera, ant-fungi and ant-plant mutualisms. Homoptera-tending ants are more likely to be forest dwelling, polygynous, ecologically dominant and arboreal nesting with large colonies of 10(4)-10(5) individuals. Mutualistic ants (including those that garden fungi and inhabit ant-plants) are found in under half of the formicid subfamilies. At the genus level, however, we find a negative association between ant-Homoptera and ant-fungi mutualisms, whereas there is a positive association between ant-Homoptera and ant-plant mutualisms. We suggest that species can only specialize in multiple mutualisms simultaneously when there is no trade-off in requirements from the different partners and no redundancy of rewards.     

Phenological shifts and the fate of mutualisms

Climate change is altering the timing of life history events in a wide array of species, many of which are involved in mutualistic interactions. Because many mutualisms can form only if partner species are able to locate each other in time, differential phenological shifts are likely to influence their strength, duration and outcome. At the extreme, climate change‐driven shifts in phenology may result in phenological mismatch: the partial or complete loss of temporal overlap of mutualistic species. We have a growing understanding of how, when, and why phenological change can alter one type of mutualism–pollination. However, as we show here, there has been a surprising lack of attention to other types of mutualism. We generate a set of predictions about the characteristics that may predispose mutualisms in general to phenological mismatches. We focus not on the consequences of such mismatches but rather on the likelihood that mismatches will develop. We explore the influence of three key characteristics of mutualism: 1) intimacy, 2) seasonality and duration, and 3) obligacy and specificity. We predict that the following characteristics of mutualism may increase the likelihood of phenological mismatch: 1) a non‐symbiotic life history in which co‐dispersal is absent; 2) brief, seasonal interactions; and 3) facultative, generalized interactions. We then review the limited available data in light of our a priori predictions and point to mutualisms that are more and less likely to be at risk of becoming phenologically mismatched, emphasizing the need for research on mutualisms other than plant–pollinator interactions. Future studies should explicitly focus on mutualism characteristics to determine whether and how changing phenologies will affect mutualistic interactions.     

PHYTOPHAGOUS INSECT–MICROBE MUTUALISMS AND ADAPTIVE EVOLUTIONARY DIVERSIFICATION

Adaptive diversification is a process intrinsically tied to species interactions. Yet, the influence of most types of interspecific interactions on adaptive evolutionary diversification remains poorly understood. In particular, the role of mutualistic interactions in shaping adaptive radiations has been largely unexplored, despite the ubiquity of mutualisms and increasing evidence of their ecological and evolutionary importance. Our aim here is to encourage empirical inquiry into the relationship between mutualism and evolutionary diversification, using herbivorous insects and their microbial mutualists as exemplars. Phytophagous insects have long been used to test theories of evolutionary diversification; moreover, the diversification of a number of phytophagous insect lineages has been linked to mutualisms with microbes. In this perspective, we examine microbial mutualist mediation of ecological opportunity and ecologically based divergent natural selection for their insect hosts. We also explore the conditions and mechanisms by which microbial mutualists may either facilitate or impede adaptive evolutionary diversification. These include effects on the availability of novel host plants or adaptive zones, modifying host-associated fitness trade-offs during host shifts, creating or reducing enemy-free space, and, overall, shaping the evolution of ecological (host plant) specialization. Although the conceptual framework presented here is built on phytophagous insect–microbe mutualisms, many of the processes and predictions are broadly applicable to other mutualisms in which host ecology is altered by mutualistic interactions.     

Phytophagous insect-microbe mutualisms and adaptive evolutionary diversification.

Adaptive diversification is a process intrinsically tied to species interactions. Yet, the influence of most types of interspecific interactions on adaptive evolutionary diversification remains poorly understood. In particular, the role of mutualistic interactions in shaping adaptive radiations has been largely unexplored, despite the ubiquity of mutualisms and increasing evidence of their ecological and evolutionary importance. Our aim here is to encourage empirical inquiry into the relationship between mutualism and evolutionary diversification, using herbivorous insects and their microbial mutualists as exemplars. Phytophagous insects have long been used to test theories of evolutionary diversification; moreover, the diversification of a number of phytophagous insect lineages has been linked to mutualisms with microbes. In this perspective, we examine microbial mutualist mediation of ecological opportunity and ecologically based divergent natural selection for their insect hosts. We also explore the conditions and mechanisms by which microbial mutualists may either facilitate or impede adaptive evolutionary diversification. These include effects on the availability of novel host plants or adaptive zones, modifying host-associated fitness trade-offs during host shifts, creating or reducing enemy-free space, and, overall, shaping the evolution of ecological (host plant) specialization. Although the conceptual framework presented here is built on phytophagous insect-microbe mutualisms, many of the processes and predictions are broadly applicable to other mutualisms in which host ecology is altered by mutualistic interactions.     

Predation drives recurrent convergence of an interspecies mutualism

Mutualisms are important ecological interactions that underpin much of the world's biodiversity. Predation risk has been shown to regulate mutualism dynamics in species‐specific case studies; however, we lack studies which investigate whether predation can also explain broader patterns of mutualism evolution. We report that fish‐anemone mutualisms have evolved on at least 55 occasions across 16 fish families over the past 60 million years and that adult body size is associated with the ontogenetic stage of anemone mutualisms: larger‐bodied species partner with anemones as juveniles, while smaller‐bodied species partner with anemones throughout their lives. Field and laboratory studies show that predators target smaller prey, that smaller fishes associate more with anemones, and that these relationships confer protection to small fishes. Our results indicate that predation is likely driving the recurrent convergent evolution of fish‐anemone mutualisms and suggest that similar ecological processes may have selected convergence in interspecies interactions in other animal clades.     

Coevolution can stabilize a mutualistic interaction

Interspecific mutualisms are ubiquitous in nature, despite their ecological and evolutionary instability. Recent studies have developed coevolutionary theory of mutualisms, which coupled population and evolutionary dynamics, to resolve the longstanding puzzle. However, earlier studies assumed a time-scale separation between these dynamics, leaving an unanswered question of how a relaxation in the time-scale separation affects the coevolutionary dynamics of mutualism. Here I relax the strong assumption to theoretically show that ecological and evolutionary dynamics occurring in a similar time scale can stabilize an otherwise unstable mutualism. I show that the coevolutionary dynamics can cause a stable limit cycle or stable equilibrium in the population sizes, even if the population sizes increase unbounded in the absence of evolutionary adaptation. In contrast, coevolution can also cause stable limit cycle even if the population dynamics is stable in the absence of evolutionary adaptation. Furthermore, the model predicts that the population dynamics is likely to converge to equilibrium when the evolutionary speed of two species is similar and fast or highly dissimilar. The results suggest that the ease of the evolutionary ‘arms race’ is of crucial importance to maintain mutualism.     

Warming, CO2, and nitrogen deposition interactively affect a plant-pollinator mutualism

Environmental changes threaten plant-pollinator mutualisms and their critical ecosystem service. Drivers such as land use, invasions and climate change can affect pollinator diversity or species encounter rates. However, nitrogen deposition, climate warming and CO(2) enrichment could interact to disrupt this crucial mutualism by altering plant chemistry in ways that alter floral attractiveness or even nutritional rewards for pollinators. Using a pumpkin model system, we show that these drivers non-additively affect flower morphology, phenology, flower sex ratios and nectar chemistry (sugar and amino acids), thereby altering the attractiveness of nectar to bumble bee pollinators and reducing worker longevity. Alarmingly, bees were attracted to, and consumed more, nectar from a treatment that reduced their survival by 22%. Thus, three of the five major drivers of global environmental change have previously unknown interactive effects on plant-pollinator mutualisms that could not be predicted from studies of individual drivers in isolation.     

Perspectives on allelopathic disruption of plant mutualisms: a framework for individual- and population-level fitness consequences

Mutualisms with mycorrhizal fungi, pollinators, and seed dispersers are critical for plant survival and reproduction. However, mutualism effectiveness is highly sensitive to disturbance by environmental stressors. Allelopathy is often overlooked, yet likely important, as a potential stress on plant mutualism function. Allelochemicals can affect plant mutualisms by either directly interfering with the plant’s ability to produce resources and rewards for its mutualistic partners or by directly or indirectly altering the non-plant mutualist’s behavior. Here we explore the potential effects of allelochemicals on plant mutualisms. Since allelochemicals can reduce plant growth and carbon acquisition, we suggest that allelopathy could directly diminish: (1) carbon provisioning to mycorrhizal fungi, (2) flower, pollen, and nectar production for pollinators, and (3) fruit attractiveness to seed dispersers. Similarly, allelochemicals that directly affect mycorrhizal fungi functioning can reduce the flow of soil resources to their plant partner. Further, volatile allelochemicals or uptake of allelochemicals from the soil by the plant could alter pollen/nectar or fruit attractiveness and indirectly influence pollinator and seed disperser behavior. Finally, we explore the extent to which plant-produced chemicals could have a direct or indirect positive effect on plant mutualisms. We end using these questions to frame future avenues of research that could help to move studies of allelopathy into the broader ecological context of mutualisms.     

Repeated colonization of remote islands by specialized mutualists

Mutualisms are ubiquitous in nature, but constraints imposed by specialization may limit their ability to colonize novel environments synchronously. The ability of mutualisms to reassemble following disturbance is central to understanding their response to global change. Here, we demonstrate that a highly specialized pollination mutualism considered to be obligate (Phyllanthaceae: Glochidion; Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae: Epicephala) has colonized some of the world's most isolated archipelagoes, and we record, to our knowledge, for the first time the presence of Epicephala moths from 19 host Glochidion species on 17 islands in the Pacific Ocean. Our findings appear to offer a remarkable example of mutualism persistence in an insect-plant interaction characterized by reciprocal specialization and mutual dependence. These findings also appear to contradict the island biogeography paradigm that taxa with specialized biotic interactions are unlikely to colonize oceanic islands.     

Parasites may help stabilize cooperative relationships

Background  

The persistence of cooperative relationships is an evolutionary paradox; selection should favor those individuals that exploit their partners (cheating), resulting in the breakdown of cooperation over evolutionary time. Our current understanding of the evolutionary stability of mutualisms (cooperation between species) is strongly shaped by the view that they are often maintained by partners having mechanisms to avoid or retaliate against exploitation by cheaters. In contrast, we empirically and theoretically examine how additional symbionts, specifically specialized parasites, potentially influence the stability of bipartite mutualistic associations. In our empirical work we focus on the obligate mutualism between fungus-growing ants and the fungi they cultivate for food. This mutualism is exploited by specialized microfungal parasites (genus Escovopsis) that infect the ant's fungal gardens. Using sub-colonies of fungus-growing ants, we investigate the interactions between the fungus garden parasite and cooperative and experimentally-enforced uncooperative ("cheating") pairs of ants and fungi. To further examine if parasites have the potential to help stabilize some mutualisms we conduct Iterative Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD) simulations, a common framework for predicting the outcomes of cooperative/non-cooperative interactions, which incorporate parasitism as an additional factor.     

As you reap, so shall you sow: coupling of harvesting and inoculating stabilizes the mutualism between termites and fungi

At present there is no consensus theory explaining the evolutionary stability of mutualistic interactions. However, the question is whether there are general 'rules', or whether each particular mutualism needs a unique explanation. Here, I address the ultimate evolutionary stability of the 'agricultural' mutualism between fungus-growing termites and Termitomyces fungi, and provide a proximate mechanism for how stability is achieved. The key to the proposed mechanism is the within-nest propagation mode of fungal symbionts by termites. The termites suppress horizontal fungal transmission by consuming modified unripe mushrooms (nodules) for food. However, these nodules provide asexual gut-resistant spores that form the inoculum of new substrate. This within-nest propagation has two important consequences: (i) the mutualistic fungi undergo severe, recurrent bottlenecks, so that the fungus is likely to be in monoculture and (ii) the termites 'artificially' select for high nodule production, because their fungal food source also provides the inoculum for the next harvest. I also provide a brief comparison of the termite-fungus mutualism with the analogous agricultural mutualism between attine ants and fungi. This comparison shows that--although common factors for the ultimate evolutionary stability of mutualisms can be identified--the proximate mechanisms can be fundamentally different between different mutualisms.