Spatially variable response of native fish assemblages to discharge,predators and habitat characteristics in an arid‐land river

1. Fish assemblages and habitats were sampled annually at fixed sites in three tributaries of the Gila River catchment over a 21‐year span that included prolonged low‐ and high‐flow periods. Model selection was used to evaluate responses of seven native fishes with variable ecological traits (four small‐bodied cyprinids, one large‐bodied cyprinid, and two large‐bodied catostomids) to mean annual discharge and predacious non‐native fishes across the three sites. We also compared habitat use and overlap of native and non‐native fishes to identify potential for negative interactions among species. 2. Assemblage structure (species abundance and richness) and recruitment of native species was strongly and primarily affected by mean annual discharge and secondarily by location and densities of non‐native predators (mainly the centrarchid Micropterus dolomieui). 3. Densities of age‐0 catostomids and small‐bodied cyprinids were positively associated with discharge, and this pattern was strongest in the tributary with the lowest densities of non‐native predators. Absence or extreme low abundance of natives during low‐flow years was most pronounced at the sites where non‐native predators were comparatively common. Densities of adults of large‐bodied native species also varied by site, but often were positively associated with densities of non‐native predators. 4. Spatially variable responses of native fish assemblages indicated that the persistence of native fishes could be jeopardized if key habitats were lost or flow regimes unnaturally altered, particularly during low‐flow conditions when recruitment of native fishes is low and predation by non‐natives is high. Large‐bodied species may be less vulnerable to multiple years of poor conditions because adults are able to avoid predation by non‐natives and thus can rely on occasional high discharge years for successful recruitment. 5. As in other arid‐land streams, native fish assemblages of the Gila River Basin continue to decline. Our results indicate that conservation requires specific knowledge and consideration of physical influences as well as life‐history attributes of native and non‐native fishes.     

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.     

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.     

Bats join the ranks of oxpeckers and cleaner fish as partners in a pest‐reducing mutualism

While antagonistic species interactions such as predation or competition have a long history of study, positive inter‐species interactions have received comparatively little attention. Mutualisms and commensalisms appear to be widespread in the animal kingdom, with examples of mammals, birds, fish, and reptiles from around the world engaging with other species in evidentially beneficial ways. Cleaning mutualism is a specific type positive inter‐species interaction in which one species removes and feeds upon parasites infesting the other. Here, we document a new subset of positive inter‐species “cleaning” interactions, in which one partner benefits from and reduces the abundance of pest species attracted by but not attached to their host. We observed in person and in camera trap footage numerous instances of insectivorous bats associating with white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and feeding on the swarms of biting flies attracted to these large mammals. We call for the increased reporting of positive inter‐species associations to better our understanding of the mechanisms leading to the formation of these interactions and the effects that these relationships may for the structuring of ecological communities.     

The future distribution of river fish: The complex interplay of climate and land use changes,species dispersal and movement barriers

The future distribution of river fishes will be jointly affected by climate and land use changes forcing species to move in space. However, little is known whether fish species will be able to keep pace with predicted climate and land use‐driven habitat shifts, in particular in fragmented river networks. In this study, we coupled species distribution models (stepwise boosted regression trees) of 17 fish species with species‐specific models of their dispersal (fish dispersal model FIDIMO) in the European River Elbe catchment. We quantified (i) the extent and direction (up‐ vs. downstream) of predicted habitat shifts under coupled “moderate” and “severe” climate and land use change scenarios for 2050, and (ii) the dispersal abilities of fishes to track predicted habitat shifts while explicitly considering movement barriers (e.g., weirs, dams). Our results revealed median net losses of suitable habitats of 24 and 94 river kilometers per species for the moderate and severe future scenarios, respectively. Predicted habitat gains and losses and the direction of habitat shifts were highly variable among species. Habitat gains were negatively related to fish body size, i.e., suitable habitats were projected to expand for smaller‐bodied fishes and to contract for larger‐bodied fishes. Moreover, habitats of lowland fish species were predicted to shift downstream, whereas those of headwater species showed upstream shifts. The dispersal model indicated that suitable habitats are likely to shift faster than species might disperse. In particular, smaller‐bodied fish (<200 mm) seem most vulnerable and least able to track future environmental change as their habitat shifted most and they are typically weaker dispersers. Furthermore, fishes and particularly larger‐bodied species might substantially be restricted by movement barriers to respond to predicted climate and land use changes, while smaller‐bodied species are rather restricted by their specific dispersal ability.     

Competition hierarchies among ants and predation by birds jointly determine the strength of multi‐species ant–aphid mutualisms

Protection mutualisms often involve multiple species of protector that vary in quality as mutualists. Because protectors may compete for access to mutualists, concordance between competitive ability and degree of benefit will determine the overall strength of multi‐species mutualisms. We compared the abilities of two similarly sized congener ants as competitors for, and mutualists of pine‐feeding aphids, and how insectivorous birds affected each ant–aphid mutualism. Formica planipilis and F. podzolica were indistinguishable in forager abundance, but the former was 13‐fold more abundant at competition baits and provided 11‐fold more benefits to aphids. These results highlight how, in a single environment, a great ecological distance can exist between two congener ants of similar size. Insectivorous birds disrupted the two mutualisms to a similar extent, reducing aphid and ant abundance by 91% and 39% respectively. Nevertheless, birds had an important influence on the relative benefits of the two ants to aphids: where F. planipilis consistently benefited aphids, F. podzolica only did so in the absence of birds. Consequently, the presence of insectivorous birds and ant species identity jointly determined whether ant–aphid mutualisms occurred in pine canopies and the strength of such interactions. Our study highlights the inter‐relatedness of competition, predation and mutualism, and how competition can serve to strengthen mutualism by filtering inferior mutualists.     

Mutualism or parasitism: Partner abundance affects host fitness in a fish reproductive interaction

相似文献   

Global stability of obligate mutualism in community modules with facultative mutualists

Mutualism is a fundamental building block of ecological communities and an important driver of biotic evolution. Classic theory suggests that a pairwise two‐species obligate mutualism is fragile, with a large perturbation potentially driving both mutualist populations into extinction. In nature, however, there are many cases of pairwise obligate mutualism. Such pairwise obligate mutualisms are occasionally associated with additional interactions with facultative mutualists. Here, we use a mathematical model to show that when a two‐species obligate mutualism has a single additional link to a third facultative mutualist, the obligate mutualism can become permanently persistent. In the model, a facultative mutualist interacts with one of two inter‐dependent obligate mutualists, and the facultative mutualist enhances the persistence not only of its directly interacting obligate mutualist, but also that of the other obligate mutualist indirectly, enabling the permanent coexistence of the three mutualist species. The effect of the facultative mutualist is strong; it can allow a three‐species permanent coexistence even when two obligate mutualists by themselves are not sustainable (i.e. not locally stable). These results suggest that facultative mutualists can play a pivotal role for the persistence of obligate mutualisms, and contribute to a better understanding on the mechanisms maintaining more complex mutualistic networks of multiple species.     

A general model for the evolution of mutualisms

The evolution of mutualisms presents a puzzle. Why does selection favour cooperation among species rather than cheaters that accept benefits but provide nothing in return? Here we present a general model that predicts three key factors will be important in mutualism evolution: (i) high benefit to cost ratio, (ii) high within‐species relatedness and (iii) high between‐species fidelity. These factors operate by moderating three types of feedback benefit from mutualism: cooperator association, partner‐fidelity feedback and partner choice. In defining the relationship between these processes, our model also allows an assessment of their relative importance. Importantly, the model suggests that phenotypic feedbacks (partner‐fidelity feedback, partner choice) are a more important explanation for between‐species cooperation than the development of genetic correlations among species (cooperator association). We explain the relationship of our model to existing theories and discuss the empirical evidence for our predictions.     

Produktion oder übernahme von schutzstoffen als ursache des Nesselschutzes von Anemonenfischen?

Investigations concerning the protection of anemone fishes have been conducted on reefs near Shimoni (Kenya). Acclimated Amphiprion xanthurus Cuv. & Val. when placed in perforated plastic boxes in the midst of anemones do not lose their protection against stinging. Unacclimated A. xanthurus became protected in this manner. Protected A. xanthurus lost their protection and unprotected ones could not acquire this protection when they were placed within a distance of 5–7 cm or more from actinians. In order to maintain the protection, the intimacy of anemones is absolutely necessary. The quality of protection acquired by the fishes depends on the species of anemone, being either good against only one species or good against several species simultaneously. The fact that the fishes remain protected only if they live in the midst of anemones or very close to them and that the degree of protection is determined by the anemone indicates the importance of the anemones for the acquisition of this protection. These results confirm the suggested mechanism of protection formulated previously by Schlichter, namely that the fishes acquire anemone-substances (‘protective substances’) during the process of acclimation. After becoming protected they bear the same chemical impregnation on their surface as, e.g., tentacles, which do not sting each other. The transmission of protecting substances to unprotected fishes by incubation with extracts from anemones was found to be impossible. After incubation in pepsin, acclimated fishes lost their protection. It seems as though anemone fishes exploit for their protection a principle which the actinians have for their own use. This mechanism exists quite independently of the symbiosis with fishes. The anemones themselves require such ‘protective substances’ for several purposes.     

Anemonefish depletion reduces survival,growth, reproduction and fishery productivity of mutualistic anemone–anemonefish colonies

Intimate knowledge of both partners in a mutualism is necessary to understand the ecology and evolution of each partner, and to manage human impacts that asymmetrically affect one of the partners. Although anemonefishes and their host anemones are iconic mutualists and widely sought by ornamental fisheries, the degree to which anemones depend on anemonefishes, and thus the colony-level effects of collecting anemonefishes, is not well understood. We tracked the size and abundance of anemone Entacmaea quadricolor and anemonefish Amphiprion melanopus colonies for 3 yr after none, some, or all of the resident anemonefish were experimentally removed. Total and partial removal of anemonefish had rapid and sustained negative effects on growth, reproduction and survival of anemones, as well as cascading effects on recruitment and productivity of anemonefish in the remaining colony. As predicted, total removal of anemonefish caused acute declines in size and abundance of anemones, although most anemone colonies (76 %) slowly resumed growth and reproduction after the arrival of anemonefish recruits, which subsequently grew and defended the hosts. Partial removal of anemonefish had similar but typically less severe effects on anemones. Remarkably, the colony-level effects on anemones and anemonefish were proportional to the size and number of anemonefish that were experimentally removed. In particular, anemone survival and anemonefish productivity were highest when one or more adult anemonefish remained in the colony, suggesting that adult fish not only enhanced the protection of anemones, but also increased the recruitment and/or survival of conspecifics. We conclude that the relationship between E. quadricolor and A. melanopus is not only obligate, but also demographically rigid and easily perturbed by anemonefish fisheries. Clearly, these two species must be managed together as a unit and with utmost precaution. To this end, we propose several tangible management actions that will help to minimize fishing effects.     

The indirect consequences of a mutualism: comparing positive and negative components of the net interaction between honeydew-tending ants and host plants

1. In ecological webs, net indirect interactions between species are composed of interactions that vary in sign and magnitude. Most studies have focused on negative component interactions (e.g. predation, herbivory) without considering the relative importance of positive interactions (e.g. mutualism, facilitation) for determining net indirect effects. 2. In plant/arthropod communities, ants have multiple top-down effects via mutualisms with honeydew-producing herbivores and harassment of and predation on other herbivores; these ant effects provide opportunities for testing the relative importance of positive and negative interspecific interactions. We manipulated the presence of ants, honeydew-producing membracids and leaf-chewing beetles on perennial host plants in field experiments in Colorado to quantify the relative strength of these different types of interactions and their impact on the ant's net indirect effect on plants. 3. In 2007, we demonstrated that ants simultaneously had a positive effect on membracids and a negative effect on beetles, resulting in less beetle damage on plants hosting the mutualism. 4. In 2008, we used structural equation modelling to describe interaction strengths through the entire insect herbivore community on plants with and without ants. The ant's mutualism with membracids was the sole strong interaction contributing to the net indirect effect of ants on plants. Predation, herbivory and facilitation were weak, and the net effect of ants reduced plant reproduction. This net indirect effect was also partially because of behavioural changes of herbivores in the presence of ants. An additional membracid manipulation showed that the membracid's effect on ant activity was largely responsible for the ant's net effect on plants; ant workers were nearly ten times as abundant on plants with mutualists, and effects on other herbivores were similar to those in the ant manipulation experiment. 5. These results demonstrate that mutualisms can be strong relative to negative direct interspecific interactions and that positive interactions deserve attention as important components of ecological webs.     

Patterns of resource-use and competition for mutualistic partners between two species of obligate cleaner fish

Cleaner mutualisms on coral reefs, where specialized fish remove parasites from many species of client fishes, have greatly increased our understanding of mutualism, yet we know little about important interspecific interactions between cleaners. Here, we explore the potential for competition between the cleaners Labroides dimidiatus and Labroides bicolor during two distinct life stages. Previous work has demonstrated that in contrast to L. dimidiatus, which establish cleaning stations, adult L. bicolor rove over large areas, searching for clients. We show that site-attached juvenile L. bicolor associate with different microhabitat than juvenile L. dimidiatus and that L. bicolor specialize on a narrower range of species than L. dimidiatus as both juveniles and adults. Further, we present evidence suggesting that differences in resource-use are influenced by competitive interactions between the two species. Finally, we discuss the implications of these results for understanding the ecology and evolution of the mutualism.     

Phylogeny and evolution of Indo-Pacific shrimp-associated gobies (Gobiiformes: Gobiidae)

Despite the ubiquity of obligate mutualisms on coral reef ecosystems, little is known about the evolution of many participating species. The shrimp gobies, known primarily from the coral reef habitats of the Indo-Pacific, are small benthic fishes that participate in a remarkable mutualism with alpheid shrimp. In this mutualism, the shrimp build and maintain a burrow that is guarded by the goby, and the shrimp and goby engage in an intricate tactile communication system. The mutualism is obligate for most shrimp gobies as participating species are highly vulnerable to predation when separated from a shrimp partner. We use phylogenetic analysis of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequence data to infer evolutionary relationships among shrimp gobies, and between shrimp gobies and their non-mutualistic gobiid relatives. We show that the mutualist shrimp association has arisen twice among gobies, once in a clade composed of Amblyeleotris, Ctenogobiops, and Vanderhorstia, and a second time in a clade including Cryptocentrus, Mahidolia, Tomiamichthys and Stonogobiops. We then compare the evolution of traits within each shrimp goby clade and consider their intrarelationships. We document cryptic diversity among shrimp gobies, with three distinct clades delineated among Mahidolia mysticina specimens captured at the same locality, paired with the same shrimp species. Mahidolia is placed as sister to the Cryptocentrus species Cryptocentrus cinctus; both exhibit pronounced dichromatism, occurring in both brown and yellow (xanthic) forms. We additionally clarify species identities within Amblyeleotris, confirming that widespread similar species Amblyeleotris fasciata, Amblyeleotris steinitzi and Amblyeleotris wheeleri are all distinct. We hypothesize that the flexibility of gobiid gobies and alpheid shrimp to interact with mutualist partners, as well as the apparently highly beneficial nature of mutualism between them, has contributed to the dual evolution of shrimp-association among Indo-Pacific gobies.     

The Costs of Mutualism

Mutualisms are of central importance in biological systems.Despite growing attention in recent years, however, few conceptualthemes have yet to be identified that span mutualisms differingin natural history. Here I examine the idea that the ecologyand evolution of mutualisms are shaped by diverse costs, notonly by the benefits they confer. This concept helps link mutualismto antagonisms such as herbivory, predation, and parasitism,interactions defined largely by the existence of costs. I firstbriefly review the range of costs associated with mutualisms,then describe how one cost, the consumption of seeds by pollinatoroffspring, was quantified for one fig/pollinator mutualism.I compare this cost to published values for other fig/pollinatormutualisms and for other kinds of pollinating seed parasitemutualisms, notably the yucca/yucca moth interaction. I thendiscuss four issues that fundamentally complicate comparativestudies of the cost of mutualism: problems of knowing how tomeasure the magnitude of any one cost accurately; problems associatedwith using average estimates in the absence of data on sourcesof variation; complications arising from the complex correlatesof costs, such as functional linkages between costs and benefits;and problems that arise from considering the cost of mutualismas a unilateral issue in what is fundamentally a reciprocalinteraction. The rich diversity of as-yet unaddressed questionssurrounding the costs of mutualism may best be investigatedvia detailed studies of individual interactions.     

Protection of host anemones by snapping shrimps: a case for symbiotic mutualism?

The sea anemone Bartholomea annulata is an ecologically important member of Caribbean coral reefs which host a variety of symbiotic crustacean associates. Crustacean exosymbionts typically gain protection from predation by dwelling with anemones. Concurrently, some symbionts may provide protection to their host by defending against anemone predators such as the predatory fireworm, Hermodice carunculata, which can severely damage or completely devour prey anemones. Herein we show through both field and laboratory studies that anemones hosting the symbiotic alpheid shrimp Alpheus armatus are significantly less likely to sustain damage by H. carunculata than anemones without this shrimp. Our results suggest that the association between A. armatus and B. annulata, although complex because of the numerous symbionts involved, may be closer to mutualism on the symbiotic continuum.     

Assemblage and interaction structure of the anemonefish-anemone mutualism across the Manado region of Sulawesi,Indonesia

The Manado area (Indonesia–North Sulawesi), a marine high diversity hot-spot, hosts 7 species of anemonefish (family Pomacentridae, subfamily Amphiprioniae) living in symbiosis with 9 species of sea anemones (family Stichodactylidae and Actiniidae). This high biological diversity −27% and 80%, respectively, of the total known diversity of anemonefish and sea anemones—allows us to test different hypotheses focused on the obligate mutualism between anemonefish and sea anemones. In the Manado area, species richness of anemones and anemonefish across several sites was not correlated, but all anemones contained at least one fish individual, and there was a strong positive correlation between the numbers of individual anemonefish and anemones. As expected, each fish species had a preferred anemone host; also a partial niche overlap (Pianka’s Index) was often detected. The analysis of unique species composition suggests that competition is not an important factor determining the presence or absence of particular combinations of either anemonefish or host anemones (no evidence of competitive exclusion). The NODF algorithm showed that, at both a regional and local scale, the interaction between anemonefish and host anemones is not significantly nested, as a result of a combination of local conditions with competition, forcing species that regionally are more generalist to become more specialist.     

EXPLAINING MUTUALISM VARIATION: A NEW EVOLUTIONARY PARADOX?

The paradox of mutualism is typically framed as the persistence of interspecific cooperation, despite the potential advantages of cheating. Thus, mutualism research has tended to focus on stabilizing mechanisms that prevent the invasion of low‐quality partners. These mechanisms alone cannot explain the persistence of variation for partner quality observed in nature, leaving a large gap in our understanding of how mutualisms evolve. Studying partner quality variation is necessary for applying genetically explicit models to predict evolution in natural populations, a necessary step for understanding the origins of mutualisms as well as their ongoing dynamics. An evolutionary genetic approach, which is focused on naturally occurring mutualist variation, can potentially synthesize the currently disconnected fields of mutualism evolution and coevolutionary genetics. We outline explanations for the maintenance of genetic variation for mutualism and suggest approaches necessary to address them.     

Mutualism can mediate competition and promote coexistence

Mutualistic interactions are not believed to promote coexistence of competitors because mutualisms produce positive feedbacks on abundances whereas coexistence requires negative feedbacks. Here we show that a mutualism between an anemonefish (Amphiprion) and its sea anemone host mediates the effect of asymmetrical competition for space between the anemonefish and another damselfish (Dascyllus) in a manner that fosters their coexistence. Amphiprion stimulates increases in host area, the shared resource, but social interactions cap the number of anemonefish to two adults per host. Space generated by the mutualism becomes differentially available to Dascyllus because the effectiveness of an anemonefish in excluding its competitor declines with increases in the area it defends. This alters Amphiprion's ratio of per capita intra‐ to interspecific effects and thus facilitates coexistence of the fishes. This mechanism may be prevalent in nature, adding another major pathway by which mutualism can enhance diversity.     

Searching for a Toxic Key to Unlock the Mystery of Anemonefish and Anemone Symbiosis

Twenty-six species of anemonefish of the genera Amphiprion and monospecific Premnas, use only 10 species of anemones as hosts in the wild (Families: Actiniidae, Stichodactylidae and Thalassianthidae). Of these 10 anemone species some are used by multiple species of anemonefish while others have only a single anemonefish symbiont. Past studies have explored the different patterns of usage between anemonefish species and anemone species; however the evolution of this relationship remains unknown and has been little studied over the past decade. Here we reopen the case, comparing the toxicity of crude venoms obtained from anemones that host anemonefish as a way to investigate why some anemone species are used as a host more than others. Specifically, for each anemone species we investigated acute toxicity using Artemia francisca (LC₅₀), haemolytic toxicity using ovine erythrocytes (EC₅₀) and neurotoxicity using shore crabs (Ozius truncatus). We found that haemolytic and neurotoxic activity varied among host anemone species. Generally anemone species that displayed greater haemolytic activity also displayed high neurotoxic activity and tend to be more toxic on average as indicated by acute lethality analysis. An overall venom toxicity ranking for each anemone species was compared with the number of anemonefish species that are known to associate with each anemone species in the wild. Interestingly, anemones with intermediate toxicity had the highest number of anemonefish associates, whereas anemones with either very low or very high toxicity had the fewest anemonefish associates. These data demonstrate that variation in toxicity among host anemone species may be important in the establishment and maintenance of anemonefish anemone symbiosis.