Plant connectivity underlies plant‐pollinator‐exploiter distributions in Ficus petiolaris and associated pollinating and non‐pollinating fig wasps

Mutualism is ubiquitous in nature, and nursery pollination mutualisms provide a system well suited to quantifying the benefits and costs of symbiotic interactions. In nursery pollination mutualisms, pollinators reproduce within the inflorescence they pollinate, with benefits and costs being measured in the numbers of pollinator offspring and seeds produced. This type of mutualism is also typically exploited by seed‐consuming non‐pollinators that obtain resources from plants without providing pollination services. Theory predicts that the rate at which pollen‐bearing ‘foundresses’ visit a plant will strongly affect the plant's production of pollinator offspring, non‐pollinator offspring, and seeds. Spatially aggregated plants are predicted to have high rates of foundress visitation, increasing pollinator and seed production, and decreasing non‐pollinator production; very high foundress visitation may also decrease seed production indirectly through the production of pollinators. Working with a nursery mutualism comprised of the Sonoran Desert rock fig, Ficus petiolaris, and host‐specific pollinating and non‐pollinating fig wasps, we use linear models to evaluate four hypotheses linking species interactions to benefits and costs: 1) foundress density increases with host‐tree connectivity, 2) pollinator production increases with foundress density, and 3) non‐pollinator production and 4) seed production decrease with pollinator production. We also directly test how tree connectivity affects non‐pollinator production. We find strong support for our four hypotheses, and we conclude that tree connectivity is a key driver of foundress visitation, thereby strongly affecting spatial distributions in the F. petiolaris community. We also find that foundress visitation decreases at the northernmost edge of the F. petiolaris range. Finally, we find species‐specific effects of tree connectivity on non‐pollinators to be strongly correlated with previously estimated non‐pollinator dispersal abilities. We conclude that plant connectivity is highly important for predicting plant‐pollinator‐exploiter dynamics, and discuss the implications of our results for species coexistence and adaptation.     

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。     

垂叶榕榕小蜂群落及种间互作网络季节动态

群落中的物种相互作用构成了复杂的生态网络。有关物种的数量和组成的季节性动态变化已有较多的研究, 但是对于生态网络的动态变化知之甚少。揭示生态网络的动态变化对于理解群落的稳定性以及群落的动态变化过程和机理具有重要意义。本研究以垂叶榕(Ficus benjamina)榕小蜂群落为研究对象, 分别在西双版纳的干季和雨季采集了榕小蜂的种类和数量信息。比较了两个季节榕小蜂群落的动态变化以及共存网络的参数(例如网路直径、连接数、嵌套性和群落矩阵温度)变化。结果显示: 雨季榕果内传粉榕小蜂Eupristina koningsbergeri所占比例高于干季, 传粉榕小蜂的种群数量也高于干季, 而在干季非传粉榕小蜂的种类增加(干季15种小蜂, 雨季14种)。从榕树-传粉榕小蜂互利共生系统的适合度来看, 干季非传粉小蜂的增加对传粉榕小蜂和榕树的适合度是不利的。在干季, 共存网络物种间的连接数(干季0.95, 雨季0.47)多于雨季, 群落矩阵温度(干季23.24, 雨季2.64)也显著高于雨季。表明干季榕小蜂群落组成及种间关系较雨季更为复杂而多样, 高的矩阵温度暗示群落受到的干扰更大。     

Quantitative tests of interaction between pollinating and non-pollinating fig wasps on dioecious Ficus hispida

Abstract.  1. The interaction between Ficus species and their pollinating wasps (Agaonidae) represents a striking example of a mutualism. Figs also shelter numerous non-pollinating chalcids that exploit the fig–pollinator mutualism.
2. Previous studies showed a weak negative correlation between numbers of pollinating and non-pollinating adults emerging from the same fruit. Little is known about the patterns and intensities of interactions between fig wasps. In the Xishuangbanna tropical rainforests of China, the dioecious Ficus hispida L. is pollinated by Ceratosolen solmsi marchali Mayr and is also exploited by the non-pollinators Philotrypesis pilosa Mayr, Philotrypesis sp., and Apocrypta bakeri Joseph. Here, the interaction of pollinator and non-pollinators on F. hispida is studied quantitatively.
3. The exact time of oviposition was determined for each species of fig wasp. Based on observational and experimental work it is suggested that (i) the relationship between pollinator and non-pollinators is a positive one, and that the genus Philotrypesis appears to have no significant impact on the pollinator population, whereas Apocrypta has a significant effect on both Philotrypesis and Ceratosolen ; (ii) gall numbers do not always increase with increasing number of foundresses, but developmental mortality of larvae correlates positively with the number of foundresses; and (iii) there is a positive correlation between non-pollinator numbers and their rates of parasitism, but the three species of non-pollinators differed in their rates of parasitism and show different effects on pollinator production.
4. The rates of parasitism when combined with the coexistent percentage and developmental mortality, underpin the way non-pollinating fig wasps successfully exploit and coexist stably in a fig–pollinator mutualism.     

Egg deposition patterns of fig pollinating wasps: implications for studies on the stability of the mutualism

1. Fig pollinating wasps (Agaonidae) enter Ficus inflorescences (figs), oviposit in some of the flowers, and pollinate in the process. Each larva completes its development within a single flower. In most cases, an inflorescence entered by a wasp will represent its only egg‐laying site. The mechanisms that prevent pollinating wasps from exploiting all the flowers inside a fig are not understood. In this study, hypotheses about flower use by pollinating fig wasps were tested by investigating egg deposition patterns in three species. 2. Either one or three wasps were introduced into figs. The figs were then harvested. Serial sections allowed assessment of the presence or absence of a wasp egg in a sample of flowers in each fig. The overall proportion of flowers with eggs and the spatial distribution of eggs were then compared in single wasp figs and three foundress figs. 3. In all species, the proportion of flowers with a wasp egg increased with foundress number but less than three‐fold. 4. In all species, at least in single foundress figs, flowers near the fig cavity were more likely to receive a wasp egg than were flowers near the fig wall. 5. In two species, when the number of foundresses was multiplied by three, there was an increase in the use of flowers near the fig wall, while in the third species, the increase was spread evenly among flowers. 6. Factors affecting wasp egg deposition patterns and the potential of investigating such patterns for studying the stability of the mutualism are discussed.     

Ability to gall: the ultimate basis of host specificity in fig wasps?

1. Fig trees (Ficus spp.) and their host‐specific pollinator fig wasps (Agaonidae) are partners in an obligate mutualism. Receptive phase figs release specific volatiles to attract their pollinators, and this is generally effective in preventing pollinator species from entering figs of the wrong hosts. 2. If entry is attempted into atypical host figs, then ostiole size and shape and style length may also prevent reproduction. In spite of these barriers, there is increasing evidence that fig wasps enter atypical hosts, and that this can result in hybrid seed and fig wasp offspring. 3. This study examines the basis of pollinator specificity in two dioecious fig species from different geographical areas. Kradibia tentacularis pollinates Ficus montana in Asia. Ficus asperifolia from East Africa is closely related but is pollinated by a different species of Kradibia. 4. In glasshouses, K. tentacularis was attracted to its normal host, F1s and backcrosses, but only rarely entered figs of F. asperifolia. Foundresses were able to lay eggs in hybrids, backcrosses, and F. asperifolia, although flower occupancy was lowest in F. asperifolia figs and intermediate in hybrids. 5. The fig wasp failed to reproduce in female F. montana, male F. asperifolia, and male F1s, and most but not all backcrosses to F. montana. This was a result of the failure to initiate gall production. 6. Host specificity in this fig wasp is strongly influenced by host volatiles, but the ability to gall may be the ultimate determinant of whether it can reproduce.     

Molecular markers reveal reproductive strategies of non‐pollinating fig wasps

1. Fig wasps have proved extremely useful study organisms for testing how reproductive decisions evolve in response to population structure. In particular, they provide textbook examples of how natural selection can favour female‐biased offspring sex ratios, lethal combat for mates and dimorphic mating strategies. 2. However, previous work has been challenged, because supposedly single species have been discovered to be a number of cryptic species. Consequently, new studies are required to determine population structure and reproductive decisions of individuals unambiguously assigned to species. 3. Microsatellites were used to determine species identity and reproductive patterns in three non‐pollinating Sycoscapter species associated with the same fig species. Foundress number was typically one to five and most figs contained more than one Sycoscapter species. Foundresses produced very small clutches of about one to four offspring, but one foundress may lay eggs in several figs. 4. Overall, the data were a poor match to theoretical predictions of solitary male clutches and gregarious clutches with n ? 1 females. However, sex ratios were male‐biased in solitary clutches and female‐biased in gregarious ones. 5. At the brood level (all wasps in a fig), a decrease in sex ratio with increasing brood size was only significant in one species, and sex ratio was unrelated to foundress number. In addition, figs with more foundresses contain more wasp offspring. 6. Finally, 10–22% of females developed in patches without males. As males are wingless, these females disperse unmated and are constrained to produce only sons from unfertilised eggs.     

Genome‐wide sequence data suggest the possibility of pollinator sharing by host shift in dioecious figs (Moraceae,Ficus)

The obligate mutualism of figs and fig‐pollinating wasps has been one of the classic models used for testing theories of co‐evolution and cospeciation due to the high species‐specificity of these relationships. To investigate the species‐specificity between figs and fig pollinators and to further understand the speciation process in obligate mutualisms, we examined the genetic differentiation and phylogenetic relationships of four closely related fig‐pollinating wasp species (Blastophaga nipponica, Blastophaga taiwanensis, Blastophaga tannoensis and Blastophaga yeni) in Japan and Taiwan using genome‐wide sequence data, including mitochondrial DNA sequences. In addition, population structure was analysed for the fig wasps and their host species using microsatellite data. The results suggest that the three Taiwanese fig wasp species are a single panmictic population that pollinates three dioecious fig species, which are sympatrically distributed, have large differences in morphology and ecology and are also genetically differentiated. Our results illustrate the first case of pollinator sharing by host shift in the subgenus Ficus. On the other hand, there are strict genetic codivergences between allopatric populations of the two host–pollinator pairs. The possible processes that produce these pollinator‐sharing events are discussed based on the level and pattern of genetic differentiation in these figs and fig wasps.     

Opportunistic pollinator shifts among sexually deceptive orchids indicated by a phylogeny of pollinating and non-pollinating thynnine wasps (Tiphiidae)

The thynnine wasp genus Neozeleboria Rohwer is the main pollinating group of the sexually deceptive Australian orchid genus, Chiloglottis R.Br. In a highly specialized interaction, Chiloglottis species attract males from a single or very few Neozeleboria species through the chemical mimicry of the female wasp's sex pheromone. An earlier study examining the historical association among Chiloglottis and Neozeleboria using DNA sequence data found matching phylogenetic patterns suggestive of cospeciation between orchids and pollinators. However, patterns of constraint in Neozeleboria emergence phenology and sex pheromones suggested that the close association among orchid and wasp clades may be due to pollinator switching among closely related wasp taxa that have similar traits. In this study, we further examine the association by incorporating a morphological phylogenetic analysis of non‐pollinating as well as pollinating Neozeleboria. The morphological analysis is then compared with DNA sequence data from one nuclear and one mitochondrial gene for an increased sample of outgroup genera. The combined molecular data set finds a monophyletic Neozeleboria, although support for this was not strong in the individual data sets. A high congruence between molecular and morphological analyses was found among higher groupings of Neozeleboria. Neozeleboria species that pollinate Chiloglottis species are not found as a monophyletic group but, rather, are scattered throughout a phylogeny comprising pollinators and non‐pollinators. Under the cospeciation model, the presence of related Neozeleboria non‐pollinators carries the unlikely implication that the association between plant and pollinator has been repeatedly lost. Instead, we favour the alternative ‘preferential pollinator switching’ model that accounts for the specialization among orchid and wasp lineages in terms of similarities in traits among related Neozeleboria. © 2005 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2005, 86 , 381–395.     

Interactions between pollinator and non‐pollinator fig wasps: correlations between their numbers can be misleading

Ficus and their species–specific pollinator fig wasps represent an obligate plant–insect mutualism, but figs also support a community of non‐pollinating fig wasps (NPFWs) that consist of phytophages and parasitoids or inquilines. We studied interactions between Kradibia tentacularis, the pollinator of a dioecious fig tree species Ficus montana, and an undescribed NPFW Sycoscapter sp. Members of Sycoscapter sp. oviposited 2–4 weeks after pollinator oviposition, when host larvae were present in the figs. No negative correlation was found between the numbers of the two wasp species emerging from figs in a semi‐natural population. However, in experiments where the numbers of pollinator foundresses entering a fig were controlled, Sycoscapter sp. significantly reduced the numbers of pollinator offspring. Consequently, it can be concluded that Sycoscapter sp. is a parasitoid of K. tentacularis (which may also feed on plant tissue). Sycoscapter females concentrate their oviposition in figs that contain more potential hosts, rendering invalid conclusions based on simple correlations of host and natural enemy numbers.     

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.     

Restructuring of a mutualism following introduction of Australian fig trees and pollinating wasps to Europe and the USA

Figs and fig-pollinating wasps are obligate mutualists that require each other to complete sexual reproduction. However, landscapers can establish populations of fig trees outside their native ranges by propagation through exported seeds, seedlings or cuttings. Once mature, these trees could be colonized by pollinating wasps and/or various non-pollinating wasps that also develop in figs. In recent decades, the Australian endemic Ficus rubiginosa has been planted widely in the Mediterranean region and in parts of the USA. Observation of ripe fruit production suggested that a pollination mutualism has been re-established by pollinating wasps colonizing trees in the plant’s introduced range. We therefore used sampling of pollinators from mainland Spain, Tenerife and California (USA) and molecular studies to characterize the restructured mutualism and compare it with the native range. In the native range, the plant is pollinated by five wasp species that form the Pleistodontes imperialis complex. However, all wasps in the introduced ranges belonged to just one of these species (P. imperialis sp. 1). Moreover, their mtDNA diversity was close to zero and the sequences clearly link them with the native southern population of this species. None of the?>?20 non-pollinating wasp species from the native range were found in the introduced ranges. In summary, the restructured mutualism has been dramatically simplified, lacking all non-pollinating wasps and all but one pollinator species from the native range. Moreover, the one pollinator species to establish successfully shows a drastic reduction in genetic diversity relative to its source population.     

Divvying up an incubator: How parasitic and mutualistic fig wasps use space within their nursery microcosm

Differential occupancy of space can lead to species coexistence. The fig–fig wasp pollination system hosts species-specific pollinating and parasitic wasps that develop within galls in a nursery comprising a closed inflorescence, the syconium. This microcosm affords excellent opportunities for investigating spatial partitioning since it harbours a closed community in which all wasp species are dependent on securing safe sites inside the syconium for their developing offspring while differing in life history, egg deposition strategies and oviposition times relative to nursery development. We determined ontogenetic changes in oviposition sites available to the seven-member fig wasp community of Ficus racemosa comprising pollinators, gallers and parasitoids. We used species distribution models (SDMs) for the first time at a microcosm scale to predict patterns of spatial occurrence of nursery occupants. SDMs gave high true-positive and low false-positive site occupancy rates for most occupants indicating species specificity in oviposition sites. The nursery microcosm itself changed with syconium development and sequential egg-laying by different wasp species. The number of sites occupied by offspring of the different wasp species was negatively related to the risk of syconium abortion by the plant host following oviposition. Since unpollinated syconia are usually aborted, parasitic wasps ovipositing into nurseries at the same time as the pollinator targeted many sites, suggesting response to lower risk of syconium abortion owing to reduced risk of pollination failure compared to those species ovipositing before pollination. Wasp life history and oviposition time relative to nursery development contributed to the co-existence of nursery occupants.     

Between‐species facilitation by male fig wasps in shared figs

1. Facilitation is recorded from diverse plant–insect interactions, including pollination and herbivory. 2. The significance of facilitation resulting from the behavior of males of multiple fig wasp species inside figs was investigated. Female fig wasps emerge from natal figs via exit holes dug by males, especially male pollinators. When no males are present, the females struggle to escape and may die. 3. Ficus microcarpa L. is a widely‐established invasive fig tree from Southeast Asia. Its pollinator is absent in South Africa, so the tree cannot reproduce, but two Asian non‐pollinating fig wasps (NPFW) Walkerella microcarpae and Odontofroggatia galili occupy its figs. Abundance patterns of the two NPFW and the proportion of male‐free figs in South Africa, Spain (where the pollinator is introduced), and in China, where the native fig wasp community is diverse, were compared to determine the consequences of reduced species richness for insect survival. 4. Female fig wasps in male‐free figs were found to be trapped, and small clutch sizes contributed to the absence of males in both species. The presence of pollinators in Spain allowed most NPFW to develop in figs containing males. Far more male‐free figs were present in South Africa, elevating mortality rates among female NPFW. Facilitation of female release by males of other NPFW species nonetheless benefitted the rarer species. 5. Selection pressures in South Africa currently favour greater aggregation of NPFW offspring and/or less female biased sex ratios.     

Non-pollinating wasps distort the sex ratio of pollinating fig wasps

In fig wasps, mating occurs among the offspring of one or a few foundress mothers within the fig, from which the mated females disperse to found new broods. Under these conditions, males will compete with each other for mating, and such local mate competition can result in female-biased sex ratios. In addition to pollinating wasps, non-pollinating wasp species are also associated with figs and develop in flower ovaries or parasitize the larvae of primary galling wasps. While studying the fig wasp Pegoscapus tonduzi , which pollinates Ficus citrifolia in Brazil, we examined the influence of non-pollinating fig wasps on the sex ratio of species that pollinate F. citrifolia to determine whether the presence of non-pollinating wasps resulted in a distorted sex ratio. There was a positive relationship between the sex ratio of P. tonduzi and the number of non-pollinating wasps that was independent of the number of foundresses and brood size. In addition, the number of non-pollinating wasps correlated negatively with the number of pollinating females, but was not significantly related to the number of pollinating males. This finding suggested that non-pollinating wasps had a direct effect in distorting the sex ratio of P. tonduzi broods. Our results indicate that the secondary sex ratio may not precisely reflect the primary sex ratio when there is a high infestation of non-pollinating fig wasps.     

Effects of within-tree flowering asynchrony on the dynamics of seed and wasp production in an Australian fig species

Abstract. Within-tree flowering asynchrony in figs, which may allow pollinating wasps to avoid the risks of dispersal in inclement conditions, has been predicted as a trait to be favoured in highly seasonal environments. Comparisons of such asynchronous figs with better-known species that exhibit within-tree synchrony might also be expected to reveal differences in the outcome of the conflict between pollinator wasp and fig seed production, and the dynamics of non-pollinating wasps. This paper presents data on wasp and seed production in Ficus rubiginosa Desf. ex Vent., an asynchronous species that occurs in the highly seasonal environment of south-eastern Australia. In contrast to recent studies of figs showing within-tree flowering synchrony, syconium size was the main determinant of wasp and seed production in F. rubiginosa . Non-pollinating wasps were highly prevalent but occurred in low numbers and appeared to have relatively little impact on pollinator wasp or fig seed production. Data on flower positions revealed that non-pollinating wasps occurred almost exclusively in the outer layer of flowers, while pollinators were more abundant in the inner flower layer, which may represent an area of enemy-free space. The ratio of seeds to female pollinator wasps, an index of fig sex allocation, was more seed-biased than in several New World fig species that exhibit within-tree synchrony. This last result supports the idea that within-tree fruiting asynchrony permits a degree of self-pollination in F. rubiginosa .     

Non‐pollinating Fig Wasps Decrease Pollinator and Seed Production in Ficus andicola (Moraceae)

Fig trees ( Ficus spp.) and Agaonine fig‐wasps participate in an obligate mutualism. Fig wasps can only develop within fig inflorescences (syconia) and they are the only organisms capable of pollinating fig flowers. Other non‐pollinating wasps that lay eggs by inserting their ovipositors from the outside can also develop in syconia. These parasitic wasps may be parasitoids of either pollinating or other non‐pollinating wasps, or form galls in fig flowers or other tissues. Depending on this interaction, parasitic wasps may have various effects on the production of pollinating wasps and seeds. Wasps in the genus Idarnes, which parasitize New World figs (subgenus Urostigma), have an effect on wasp production but not on seed production. Heterandrium spp., which have short ovipositors and lay on external flowers, are infrequent and no effect on seed production has been documented. In the Colombian Andes, Idarnes spp. and Heterandrium spp. are the most frequent parasites of the Ficus andicola — Pegoscapus sp. mutualism, affecting 62 and 43 percent of syconia, respectively. Controlling for other factors that influence wasp and seed production, such as number of foundresses, syconium size and tree, we found that Idarnes reduced pollinator production by almost half but did not reduce seed production, whereas Heterandrium reduced seed production by 40 percent, and marginally affected pollinator production. Our results provide the first clear documentation of Heterandrium spp. impact on fig seed production. Whether the relative abundance of this genus is a generalized phenomenon in montane forest remains to be determined.     

Inferring processes of coevolutionary diversification in a community of Panamanian strangler figs and associated pollinating wasps*

The fig and pollinator wasp obligate mutualism is diverse (～750 described species), ecologically important, and ancient (～80 Ma). Once thought to be an example of strict one‐to‐one cospeciation, current thinking suggests genera of pollinator wasps codiversify with corresponding sections of figs, but the degree to which cospeciation or other processes contribute to the association at finer scales is unclear. Here, we use genome‐wide sequence data from a community of Panamanian strangler figs and associated wasp pollinators to estimate the relative contributions of four evolutionary processes generating cophylogenetic patterns in this mutualism: cospeciation, host switching, pollinator speciation, and pollinator extinction. Using a model‐based approach adapted from the study of gene family evolution, our results demonstrate the importance of host switching of pollinator wasps at this fine phylogenetic and regional scale. Although we estimate a modest amount of cospeciation, simulations reveal the number of putative cospeciation events to be consistent with what would be expected by chance. Additionally, model selection tests identify host switching as a critical parameter for explaining cophylogenetic patterns in this system. Our study demonstrates a promising approach through which the history of evolutionary association between interacting lineages can be rigorously modeled and tested in a probabilistic phylogenetic framework.     

榕-传粉小蜂化学通讯机制研究进展

榕属植物与其传粉小蜂组成了高度专一的专性共生关系(榕-蜂共生系统),如此高度紧密的互作关系被认为是驱动两者多样化的关键因素。榕-蜂共生系统主要依靠化学通讯完成相互识别,但目前仍不清楚化学通讯是如何维系现有共生关系并促进物种形成的。结合已有研究,系统梳理了榕-蜂共生系统化学通讯的基础与两者特异性识别的机制,阐述化学通讯在物种和种群层次对维持这一专性传粉关系的重要贡献,进而探讨化学通讯如何在协同成种和宿主转移成种两种模式中介导物种形成。最后,结合生理与多组学等技术展望榕-蜂共生系统的未来研究方向,为深入解析植物与昆虫协同进化的机制以及全球变化下物种的潜在响应模式提供重要参考。     

Parasites and mutualism function: measuring enemy‐free space in a fig–pollinator symbiosis

Mutualisms involve cooperation between species and underpin several ecosystem functions. However, there is also conflict between mutualists, because their interests are not perfectly aligned. In addition, most mutualisms are exploited by parasites. Here, we study the interplay between cooperation, conflict and parasitism in the mutualism between fig trees and their pollinator wasps. Conflict occurs because each fig ovary can nurture either one seed or one pollinator offspring and, while fig trees benefit directly from seeds and pollinator offspring (pollen vectors), pollinators only benefit directly from pollinator offspring. The mechanism(s) of conflict resolution is debated, but must explain the widespread observation that pollinators develop in inner, and seeds in outer, layers of fig flowers. We recently suggested a role for non‐pollinating figs wasps (NPFWs) that are natural enemies or competitors of the pollinators and lay their eggs through the fig wall. Most NPFW offspring develop in outer and middle layer flowers, suggesting that inner flowers provide enemy‐free space for pollinator offspring. Here, we test the hypothesis that NPFWs cannot reach inner flowers, by measuring wasp and fig morphology at the species‐specific times of NPFW attack in the field. We found that three species of Sycoscapter and Philotrypesis wasps that parasitise pollinators could reach 34–73%, 75–92% and 82–97% of fig ovaries, respectively. Meanwhile, Eukobelea and Pseudidarnes gall‐formers, despite having shorter ovipositors, can access almost all fig flowers (93–99% and 100%), because they attack smaller (younger) fig fruits. Our mechanistic results from ovipositing wasps support spatial patterns of wasp offspring segregation within figs to suggest that inner ovules provide enemy‐free‐space for pollinators. This may contribute to mutualism stability by helping select for pollinators to avoid laying eggs where they are likely to be parasitised. These outer flowers then remain free to develop as seeds, promoting mutualism persistence.