Laticifer distribution in fig inflorescence and its potential role in the fig-fig wasp mutualism

Although in Moraceae the presence of laticifers is considered to be a synapomorphy, little is known about the distribution and morphology of this type of secretory structure in the reproductive organs of its species. Ficus, the largest genus of Moraceae, is characterized by an inflorescence known as syconium and by an obligate mutualistic interaction with pollinating wasps. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the distribution and morphology of laticifers in syconia of 36 species belonging to different Ficus sections and to survey traits of taxonomic and adaptive value for the group. Syconia containing flowers in a receptive state were collected, fixed and processed for anatomical analysis. All species studied have branched laticifers distributed in the syconium receptacle, in the ostiolar bracts and in the pedicel of staminate flowers. Almost all species show laticifers in the pedicel of shorter-styled flowers. Laticifers also occur in the pedicel of longer-styled flowers in most Ficus sections, except F. curtipes (Conosycea section) and more than 75% of the studied species of the Americanae section. Laticifers are observed in the sepals of 25 of the 36 species studied and occasionally in the pistil. The presence of laticifers in the pedicel of shorter-style flowers and its absence in the pistil suggest that the distribution of this secretory structure in the fig flower was selected by pressures imposed by the fig-fig wasp mutualism. The laticifers in the pedicel of shorter-styled flowers may confer protection to the developing wasp larvae against natural enemies. However, the absence of laticifers in the pistil of most Ficus species studied was probably selected by the mutualistic relationship with the agaonid pollinating wasps since the latex could interfere with oviposition through the style, with the larval development of the pollinating fig wasps, and the emergence of pollinator offspring from their galls.     

Non‐pollinating cheater wasps benefit from seasonally poor performance of the mutualistic pollinating wasps at the northern limit of the range of Ficus microcarpa

1. Species interactions in tightly bound ecological mutualisms often feature highly specialised species' roles in which competitive exclusion may preclude multi‐species coexistence. Among the 800 fig (Ficus) species, it was originally considered that each was pollinated by their own wasp (Agaonidae). However, recent investigations show that this ‘one‐to‐one’ rule often breaks down, as fig species regularly host multiple agaonids but in ways suggesting that competitive processes still mediate biodiversity outcomes. 2. A phenological survey was conducted of the fig–fig wasp pair, Ficus microcarpa and its associated pollinating wasp, alongside its sister species, the cheating wasp, in Xishuangbanna, China. 3. Reproductive output underwent extreme seasonal variation. Seed and pollinator production fell markedly during cooler, drier months, although high levels of fig production continued. However, this resource was predominantly utilised by the cheater species, which offers no pollination services. Pollinators and cheaters rarely co‐occur, suggesting that temporal coexistence is constrained by competition for access to figs. 4. The overall findings indicate periodic rearrangements of mutualism dynamics, probably resulting from a strongly seasonal environment. Sympatric co‐occurrence may result from a window of opportunity for a functionally divergent agaonid, potentially due to constraints on the main pollinator in adapting to variable year‐round conditions that prevent competitive exclusion.     

Plasticity and diversity of the phenology of dioecious Ficus species in Taiwan

While Ficus present a series of traits often associated with dioecy, the prevalence of dioecy in Ficus is atypical. In Asian floras, dioecious Ficus species generally outnumber monoecious ones. Further this is also true in relatively northerly locations for Ficus such as the island of Taiwan. Ficus are pollinated by species-specific wasps that use fig flowers as breeding sites. In dioecious fig species, pollinators develop only in the inflorescences of male fig trees. In this study, we investigated the reproductive phenology of four dioecious Ficus species with distinct ecologies in several locations in northern and southern Taiwan. The two first species (Ficus erecta and Ficus septica) were investigated in four locations. Reproductive phenology was quite different among sites, even within a single species. For example, F. erecta presented well-defined crops at the population level in its usual high-elevation habitat but continuous fig production at low elevations, especially in South Taiwan. The two other fig species (Ficus pedunculosa var. mearnsii and Ficus tinctoria subsp. swinhoei), are shrubs growing together along seashores in exposed locations on coral reef remnants. These two species presented quite different traits allowing the survival of pollinating wasp populations. Ficus pedunculosa var. mearnsii produced figs continuously so that fresh receptive figs were always available for the pollinating wasps while F. tinctoria subsp. swinhoei extended the period of receptivity of its figs, so that receptive figs that had been waiting for pollinating wasps were almost always available. In summary, dioecious figs in Taiwan showed remarkable variation in their phenology, within species among locations or among species within location. Nevertheless, despite this variation, the phenology of the trees always allowed survival of pollinating wasp populations. Dioecious figs seem to have adopted a differentiated set of strategies which result in high resilience of pollinator populations. This resilience could help explain the atypical prevalence of dioecy in Ficus.     

Pollinator sharing in dioecious figs (Ficus: Moraceae)

As one of the most specialized pollination syndromes, the fig (Ficus)–fig wasp (Agaonidae) mutualism can shed light on how pollinator behaviour and specificity affect plant diversification through processes such as reproductive isolation and hybridization. Pollinator sharing among species has important implications for Ficus species delimitation and the evolutionary history of the mutualism. Although agaonid wasp pollinators are known to visit more than one host species in monoecious figs, pollinator sharing has yet to be documented in dioecious figs. The present study investigated the frequency of pollinator sharing among sympatric, closely‐related dioecious figs in Ficus sections Sycocarpus and Sycidium. Molecular and morphological species identification established the associations between pollinating agaonid wasp species and host fig species. Cytochrome oxidase I was sequenced from 372 Ceratosolen pollinators of Ficus section Sycocarpus and 210 Kradibia pollinators of Ficus section Sycidium. The association between fig species and morphologically distinct clades of pollinator haplotypes was predominantly one‐to‐one. In Ceratosolen, six of 372 pollinators (1.5%) visited fig species other than the predominant host. No pollinator sharing was detected between the two Sycidium host species, although a rare hybrid shared Kradibia pollinators with both parental species. These findings point to low rates of pollinator sharing among closely‐related dioecious fig species in sympatry, and perhaps lower rates than among monoecious figs. Such rare events could be evolutionarily important as mechanisms for gene flow among fig species. Differences in rates of pollinator sharing among fig lineages might explain the conflicting phylogenetic patterns inferred among monoecious figs, dioecious figs, and their respective pollinators. © 2011 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2011, 103 , 546–558.     

Ficus racemosa is pollinated by a single population of a single agaonid wasp species in continental South‐East Asia

High specificity in the Ficus‐agaonid wasp mutualism has lead to the assumption of a mostly ‘one‐to‐one’ relationship, albeit with some exceptions. This view has been challenged by new molecular data in recent years, but surprisingly little is known about local and spatial genetic structuring of agaonid wasp populations. Using microsatellite markers, we analysed genetic structuring of Ceratosolen fusciceps, the fig wasp pollinating Ficus racemosa, a fig tree species widely distributed from India to Australia. In sampling stretching from the south of China to the south of Thailand we found evidence for only a single pollinating wasp species in continental South‐East Asian mainland. We found no evidence for the co‐occurrence of cryptic species within our subcontinent sampling zone. We observed no spatial genetic structure within sites and only limited structuring over the whole sampling zone, suggesting that F. racemosa is pollinated by a single population of a single agaonid wasp species all over continental South‐East Asia. An additional sample of wasps collected on F. racemosa in Australia showed clear‐cut genetic differentiation from the Asian continent, suggesting allopatric divergence into subspecies or species. We propose that the frequent local co‐occurrence of sister species found in the literature mainly stems from contact zones between biogeographic regions, and that a single pollinator species over wide areas might be the more common situation everywhere else.     

Phylogeography and virulence structure of the powdery mildew population on its 'new' host triticale

Background

The interaction between insects and plants takes myriad forms in the generation of spectacular diversity. In this association a species host range is fundamental and often measured using an estimate of phylogenetic concordance between species. Pollinating fig wasps display extreme host species specificity, but the intraspecific variation in empirical accounts of host affiliation has previously been underestimated. In this investigation, lineage delimitation and codiversification tests are used to generate and discuss hypotheses elucidating on pollinating fig wasp associations with Ficus.

Results

Statistical parsimony and AMOVA revealed deep divergences at the COI locus within several pollinating fig wasp species that persist on the same host Ficus species. Changes in branching patterns estimated using the generalized mixed Yule coalescent test indicated lineage duplication on the same Ficus species. Conversely, Elisabethiella and Alfonsiella fig wasp species are able to reproduce on multiple, but closely related host fig species. Tree reconciliation tests indicate significant codiversification as well as significant incongruence between fig wasp and Ficus phylogenies.

Conclusions

The findings demonstrate more relaxed pollinating fig wasp host specificity than previously appreciated. Evolutionarily conservative host associations have been tempered by horizontal transfer and lineage duplication among closely related Ficus species. Independent and asynchronistic diversification of pollinating fig wasps is best explained by a combination of both sympatric and allopatric models of speciation. Pollinator host preference constraints permit reproduction on closely related Ficus species, but uncertainty of the frequency and duration of these associations requires better resolution.     

Can fine-scale post-pollination variation of fig volatile compounds explain some steps of the temporal succession of fig wasps associated with Ficus racemosa?

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by flowers play an essential role in mediating the attraction of pollinators. However, they also attract other species exploiting resources associated with flowers. For instance, VOCs emitted by figs play a major role in encounters between Ficus spp., their mutualistic pollinating wasps, and all the members of the community of non-pollinating fig wasps (NPFWs) that exploit the mutualistic interaction. Because pollinators might be in limited supply for a tree bearing many inflorescences, the plant might maximize its individual reproductive success by reducing the attractiveness of inflorescences once they are pollinated, so that pollinators orient only towards the tree's unpollinated figs. Changes in VOCs emission that bring this about could represent an important cue for NPFWs that exploit particular stages of fig development. In this study, by monitoring precisely the presence of fig-associated wasps on figs of F. racemosa, a common widespread fig species, we demonstrated that 4–5 days and 15 days following pollination represent two critical transitional steps in the succession of different wasp species. Then, focusing on the first one of these transitional steps, by investigating the composition of fig VOCs at receptivity and from 1 to 5 days following pollination, we detected progressive quantitative and qualitative variation of floral scent following pollination. These changes are significant at 5 days following pollination. The qualitative changes are mainly due to an increase in the relative proportions of two monoterpenes (α-pinene and limonene). These variations of the floral VOCs following pollination could explain why pollinating wasps stop visiting figs very shortly after the first pollinators enter receptive figs. They also possibly explain the succession of non-pollinating wasps on the figs following pollination.     

Culture-Free Survey Reveals Diverse and Distinctive Fungal Communities Associated with Developing Figs (Ficus spp.) in Panama

The ancient association of figs (Ficus spp.) and their pollinating wasps (fig wasps; Chalcidoidea, Hymenoptera) is one of the most interdependent plant–insect mutualisms known. In addition to pollinating wasps, a diverse community of organisms develops within the microcosm of the fig inflorescence and fruit. To better understand the multipartite context of the fig–fig wasp association, we used a culture-free approach to examine fungal communities associated with syconia of six species of Ficus and their pollinating wasps in lowland Panama. Diverse fungi were recovered from surface-sterilized flowers of all Ficus species, including gall- and seed flowers at four developmental stages. Fungal communities in syconia and on pollinating wasps were similar, dominated by diverse and previously unknown Saccharomycotina, and distinct from leaf- and stem endophyte communities in the same region. Before pollination, fungal communities were similar between gall- and seed flowers and among Ficus species. However, fungal communities differed significantly in flowers after pollination vs. before pollination, and between anciently diverged lineages of Ficus with active vs. passive pollination syndromes. Within groups of relatively closely related figs, there was little evidence for strict-sense host specificity between figs and particular fungal species. Instead, mixing of fungal communities among related figs, coupled with evidence for possible transfer by pollinating wasps, is consistent with recent suggestions of pollinator mixing within syconia. In turn, changes in fungal communities during fig development and ripening suggest an unexplored role of yeasts in the context of the fig–pollinator wasp mutualism.     

Utilisation of chemical signals by inquiline wasps in entering their host figs

The fig tree, Ficus curtipes, hosts an obligate pollinating wasp, an undescribed Eupristina sp., but can also be pollinated by two inquiline (living in the burrow, nest, gall, or other habitation of another animal) wasps, Diaziella yangi and an undescribed Lipothymus sp. The two inquilines are unable to independently induce galls and depend on the galls induced by the obligate pollinator for reproduction and, therefore, normally enter receptive F. curtipes figs colonised by the obligate pollinators. However, sometimes the inquilines also enter figs that are not colonised by the pollinators, despite consequent reproductive failure. It is still unknown which signal(s) the inquilines use in entering the colonised and non-colonised figs. We conducted behavioural experiments to investigate several possible signals utilised by the inquilines in entering their host receptive figs. Our investigation showed that both inquiline species enter the receptive F. curtipes figs in response to the body odours of the obligate wasps and one of the main compounds emitted by the figs, 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one. The compound was not found in the pollinator body odours, suggesting that the two inquiline wasps can utilise two signals to enter their host figs, which is significant for the evolution of the fig-fig wasp system. These inquilines could evolve to become mutualists of the figs if they evolve the ability to independently gall fig flowers; there is, however, another possibility that a monoecious Ficus species hosting such inquilines may evolve into a dioecious one if these inquilines cannot evolve the above-mentioned ability. Additionally, this finding provides evidence for the evolution of chemical communication between plants and insects.     

Some pollinators are more equal than others: Factors influencing pollen loads and seed set capacity of two actively and passively pollinating fig wasps

The nursery pollination system of fig trees (Ficus) results in the plants providing resources for pollinator fig wasp larvae as part of their male reproductive investment, with selection determining relative investment into pollinating wasps and the pollen they carry. The small size of Ficus pollen suggests that the quantities of pollen transported by individual wasps often limits male reproductive success. We assessed variation in fig wasp pollen loads and its influence on seed production in actively pollinated (Ficus montana) and passively pollinated (Ficus carica) dioecious fig trees.The ratios of number of male flowers on number of female flowers in a glasshouse-maintained F. montana population were highly variable. When fig wasps were introduced into receptive female figs, the resulting seed numbers were strongly linked to the numbers of pollinators that had been seeking access to pollen, relative to the number of anthers in their natal figs. In F. carica estimates of the amounts of pollen produced per fig and the quantities of pollen carried by emerging fig wasps suggest that less than 10% of the pollen is transported. Pollinators of F. carica that emerged earlier from figs carried more pollen, and also generated more seeds when introduced into receptive female figs.We show here that all pollinators are not equally valuable and producing more pollinators is not necessarily a good option in terms of Ficus male fitness. Previous results on F. montana figs showed that only around half of the flowers where pollinators lay eggs produced adult offspring. The amount of pollen collected by young female fig wasps may be a major determinant of their reproductive success.     

Multiple parapatric pollinators have radiated across a continental fig tree displaying clinal genetic variation

The ways that plant‐feeding insects have diversified are central to our understanding of terrestrial ecosystems. Obligate nursery pollination mutualisms provide highly relevant model systems of how plants and their insect associates have diversified and the over 800 species of fig trees (Ficus) allow comparative studies. Fig trees can have one or more pollinating fig wasp species (Agaonidae) that breed within their figs, but factors influencing their number remain to be established. In some widely distributed fig trees, the plants form populations isolated by large swathes of sea, and the different populations are pollinated by different wasp species. Other Ficus species with continuous distributions may present genetic signatures of isolation by distance, suggesting more limited pollinator dispersal, which may also facilitate pollinator speciation. We tested the hypothesis that Ficus hirta, a species for which preliminary data showed genetic isolation by distance, would support numerous pollinator species across its range. Our results show that across its range F. hirta displays clinal genetic variation and is pollinated by nine parapatric species of Valisia. This is the highest number of pollinators reported to date for any Ficus species, and it is the first demonstration of the occurrence of parapatric pollinator species on a fig host displaying continuous genetic structure. Future comparative studies across Ficus species should be able to establish the plant traits that have driven the evolution of pollinator dispersal behaviour, pollinator speciation and host plant spatial genetic structure.     

How to be a fig wasp down under: The diversity and structure of an Australian fig wasp community

Endophytic insects and their parasitoids provide valuable models for community ecology. The wasp communities in inflorescences of fig trees have great potential for comparative studies, but we must first describe individual communities. Here, we add to the few detailed studies of such communities by describing the one associated with Ficus rubiginosa in Australia. First, we describe community composition, using two different sampling procedures. Overall, we identified 14 species of non-pollinating fig wasp (NPFW) that fall into two size classes. Small wasps, including pollinators, gallers and their parasitoids, were more abundant than large wasps (both galler and parasitoid species). We show that in figs where wasps emerge naturally, the presence of large wasps may partly explain the low emergence of small wasps. During fig development, large gallers oviposit first, before and around the time of pollination, while parasitoids lay eggs after pollination. We further show that parasitoids in the subfamily Sycoryctinae, which comprise the majority of all individual NPFWs, segregate temporally by laying eggs at different stages of fig development. We discuss our results in terms of species co-existence and community structure and compare our findings to those from fig wasp communities on other continents.     

Morphological diversity and function of the stigma in Ficus species (Moraceae)

The stigma plays several roles such as pollen hydration and selection, and pollen tube nutrition. In the Ficus-fig wasp mutualism, stigmata have an additional, almost unknown, function by representing a physical interface for both plant and wasp reproduction. We used light and electron microscopy to compare the detailed morphology of the stigmata of nine Ficus species of different sections and with different pollination modes and sexual expressions. Figs were collected at the stage when the stigmata were receptive for pollination. Stigmata in actively pollinated monoecious species have well developed papillae concentrated on the adaxial surface exposed towards the fig cavity. Conversely, the passively pollinated monoecious species have the whole surface of the stigmata covered by somewhat smaller papillae. In both actively and passively pollinated monoecious species these features are consistent, irrespective of style length. In all actively pollinated gynodioecious species, the stigmata of pistillate flowers were tubular or infundibuliform whereas in almost all actively pollinated monoecious species (except F. racemosa) the stigmata were filiform, with one branch or two asymmetric branches. In gynodioecious species the short-styled flowers in “male” figs show a limited receptive surface with small papillae, while the stigmata of long-styled flowers in “female” figs are covered by papillae that extend down the sides of the style, increasing the stigmatic surface. In actively pollinated species, stigmata are cohesive, forming a common surface for pollen tube germination (= synstigma). The synstigma arrangement was quite variable: lax, cohesive or very cohesive, with entanglement by stigmatic papillae and stylar trichomes. Entanglement by stylar trichomes is common in gynodioecious species. The synstigma arrangement did not correlate with phylogeny or breeding system. This study is the first to report a very loose synstigma in actively pollinated monoecious Ficus species. Our analyses revealed that, in Ficus, the synstigma is functionally analogous to an extra-gynoecial compitum. Comparative studies will be required to test further hypotheses about the evolutionary determinants of such variation.     

Foundress Fig Wasps are More Likely to Re-emerge From Older Figs

The mutualistic interaction between Ficus spp. and their pollinating fig wasps (Agaonidae) centres on the plants’ unique inflorescences—their figs. Each Ficus species is pollinated by foundresses of host-specific fig wasps which enter figs to lay eggs in the female flowers. Most foundresses are trapped in the first figs they enter, but in some species wingless foundresses can re-emerge and subsequently enter and oviposit into further figs. We investigated whether number of potential oviposition sites, age of the fig and age of the wasp influence the likelihood of re-emergence of lone foundresses of the Asian fig wasp Kradibia (=Liporrhopalum) tentacularis from previously un-entered figs of Ficus montana. Likelihood of re-emergence was not influenced by wasp age or flower numbers (resource abundance), but was more frequent from older figs that had waited longer to be pollinated. Laying eggs in several figs offers clear advantages, but foundresses often failed to re-emerge despite being unable to lay all their eggs. Resource quality not quantity appears to be the main influence on the fig wasp’s oviposition decisions. The physical difficulty that the wasps experience when trying to re-emerge may prevent it, even when re-emergence would be advantageous for both the insect and its host plant, but older fig wasps were not detectably ‘weaker’ than younger individuals.     

Measuring the discrepancy between fecundity and lifetime reproductive success in a pollinating fig wasp

Lifetime reproductive success in female insects is often egg‐ or time‐limited. For instance in pro‐ovigenic species, when oviposition sites are abundant, females may quickly become devoid of eggs. Conversely, in the absence of suitable oviposition sites, females may die before laying all of their eggs. In pollinating fig wasps (Hymenoptera: Agaonidae), each species has an obligate mutualism with its host fig tree species [Ficus spp. (Moraceae)]. These pro‐ovigenic wasps oviposit in individual ovaries within the inflorescences of monoecious Ficus (syconia, or ‘figs’), which contain many flowers. Each female flower can thus become a seed or be converted into a wasp gall. The mystery is that the wasps never oviposit in all fig ovaries, even when a fig contains enough wasp females with enough eggs to do so. The failure of all wasps to translate all of their eggs into offspring clearly contributes to mutualism persistence, but the underlying causal mechanisms are unclear. We found in an undescribed Brazilian Pegoscapus wasp population that the lifetime reproductive success of lone foundresses was relatively unaffected by constraints on oviposition. The number of offspring produced by lone foundresses experimentally introduced into receptive figs was generally lower than the numbers of eggs carried, despite the fact that the wasps were able to lay all or most of their eggs. Because we excluded any effects of intraspecific competitors and parasitic non‐pollinating wasps, our data suggest that some pollinators produce few offspring because some of their eggs or larvae are unviable or are victims of plant defences.     

Ancient fig wasps indicate at least 34 Myr of stasis in their mutualism with fig trees

Fig wasps and fig trees are mutually dependent, with each of the 800 or so species of fig trees (Ficus, Moraceae) typically pollinated by a single species of fig wasp (Hymenoptera: Agaonidae). Molecular evidence suggests that the relationship existed over 65 Ma, during the Cretaceous. Here, we record the discovery of the oldest known fossil fig wasps, from England, dated at 34 Ma. They possess pollen pockets that contain fossil Ficus pollen. The length of their ovipositors indicates that their host trees had a dioecious breeding system. Confocal microscopy and scanning electron microscopy reveal that the fossil female fig wasps, and more recent species from Miocene Dominican amber, display the same suite of anatomical characters associated with fig entry and pollen-carrying as modern species. The pollen is also typical of modern Ficus. No innovations in the relationship are discernible for the last tens of millions of years.     

Secondary galling: a novel feeding strategy among ‘non‐pollinating’ fig wasps from Ficus curtipes

相似文献   

Geographic variation of floral scent in a highly specialized pollination mutualism

Floral scents are important signals for communication between plants and pollinators. Several studies have focused on interspecific variation of these signals, but little is known about intraspecific variation in flower scent, particularly for species with wide geographic distributions. In the highly specific mutualism between Ficus species and their pollinating wasps, chemical mediation is crucial for partner encounter. Several studies show that scents, i.e. blends of volatiles, are species-specific, but no studies address interpopulation variation of scents in fig pollination mutualisms, which often have broad geographic distributions. In this study, using absorption/desorption headspace techniques, we analyzed variation in floral scent composition among three populations of each of two widely distributed Asian Ficus species. We identified more than 100 different volatile organic compounds, predominantly terpenes. In both species, significant differences were found between scent bouquets of East Asian and Indian populations. These differences are discussed in relation to geographical barriers that could disrupt gene exchange between these two areas, thereby isolating Indian populations from those of Eastern Asia.     

Chemical mediation and niche partitioning in non-pollinating fig-wasp communities

1. The parasitic chalcidoid wasps associated with the species-specific and obligatory pollination mutualisms between Ficus spp. and their agaonid wasp pollinators provide a good model to study the functional organization of communities. 2. However, communities of non-pollinating fig wasps (NPFWs) remain little characterized, and their functioning and evolutionary dynamics are still poorly understood. 3. We studied the communities of NPFWs associated with the monoecious F. racemosa and the dioecious F. hispida. Associated with these two fig species are a total of seven wasp species belonging to three genera. These species present contrasts in life history traits and in timing of oviposition. The species studied are thus broadly representative of the communities of NPFWs associated specifically with fig-pollinator mutualisms. 4. In our study systems, there is temporal segregation of oviposition time among members of NPFW communities. 5. We tested the role of volatile chemicals in the attraction of NPFWs associated with these two fig species, and tried to determine if chemical mediation can explain the organization of the communities. 6. We conducted odour choice tests using a Y-tube olfactometer. All the NPFWs studied were shown to use volatile chemicals produced by the fig to locate their host. Furthermore, the signals used by each species depended on the phenological stage of the fig they exploit. 7. Results demonstrated that the pattern of oviposition results from the utilization of volatile signals produced by figs that vary in their composition at different stages of fig development. Thus, chemical mediation allows resource partitioning in the NPFW communities associated with fig-pollinator mutualisms, and suggests hypotheses to explain coexistence in other parasite communities.     

高榕雌花期传粉榕小蜂和欺骗性小蜂的繁殖特点

榕树及其专一性传粉榕小蜂组成了动植物界最为经典的协同进化关系,传粉榕小蜂演化出欺骗性是非常罕见的。在雌雄同株的高榕隐头果内,共存着一种传粉榕小蜂Eupristina altissima和一种欺骗性的小蜂Eupristina sp.,两种小蜂在雌花期进入隐头果内繁殖,但有不同的繁殖特点。对比研究了两种小蜂从成虫羽化到产卵和传粉这个阶段的雌蜂个体大小、孕卵量及繁殖差异,结果表明:羽化期两种雌蜂的平均个体小,经飞行小个体的雌蜂易死亡,大个体雌蜂到达接受树,但通过苞片通道,一些个体较大的传粉榕小蜂被夹死导致进入果腔的雌蜂相对小,而欺骗性小蜂易通过苞片以至进入果腔的雌蜂个体较大。两种未产卵雌蜂均表现为个体大者孕卵量较多,但两种雌蜂的平均孕卵量没有差异。即使有充足雌花资源产卵,两种雌蜂均未产完所有卵,产卵后两种雌蜂卵巢中的卵量均显著减少,遗留下的卵量两种小蜂间没有差异。传粉榕小蜂只有部分个体传完所携带花粉,并表现为传粉越成功的雌蜂,产卵越多。存在种内竞争时,两种小蜂的产卵量均减少,传粉榕小蜂的传粉效率也降低。在种间竞争背景下,欺骗性小蜂产卵更成功,传粉榕小蜂的产卵和传粉量均受到极大抑制。研究结果说明雌花期隐头果内传粉榕小蜂只适量利用雌花资源产卵繁殖后代,更有效地传粉繁殖榕树种子,这可能是维持榕-蜂互惠系统稳定共存的重要机制之一;欺骗者稳定存在需降低与传粉者的直接竞争,而欺骗者和传粉者分散在不同果内,甚至是不同的树上繁殖是理想的繁殖策略。