Floral constraint resulting from intersexual mimicry in a gynodioecious fig tree

Fig trees (Ficus: Moraceae) are pollinated by female fig wasps (Agaonidae) whose larvae develop inside galled flowers of unusual inflorescences (figs). Most fig trees also support communities of non‐pollinating fig wasps. Figs of different species display great size variation and contain tens to tens of thousands of flowers. Around one‐half the species of fig trees have the gynodioecious breeding system, where female trees have figs that produce seeds and male trees have figs that support development of pollinators. Mutual mimicry between receptive male and female figs ensures that pollinators enter female figs, even though the insects will die without reproducing, but the need to give no sex‐specific cues to the pollinators may constrain differences in size between receptive male and female figs. We compared relationships between inflorescence size and some measures of reproductive success in male and female figs of Ficus montana grown under controlled conditions in the presence of the pollinator Kradibia tentacularis and its main parasitoid Sycoscapter sp. indesc. Female figs that contained more flowers produced more seeds, but male figs did not increase the production of female pollinator K. tentacularis fig wasps in proportion of the flower number. Although more flowers were galled by the pollinators in male figs containing more female flowers, the high larval mortality caused by parasitism and nutritional limitation prevented the increase in the production of adult female offspring. Selection may favor the increase in flower numbers within figs in female plants of F. montana, but contrarily constrain this attribute in male plants.     

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.     

Putting your eggs in several baskets: oviposition in a wasp that walks between several figs

The interaction between figs (Ficus spp., Moraceae) and their pollinator fig wasps (Hymenoptera: Agaonidae) is an obligate mutualism, but females of dioecious fig trees exploit fig wasps without providing rewards. Figs are closed inflorescences that typically trap pollinator females after entry, but some fig wasp species can re‐emerge (although wingless) and subsequently oviposit in and pollinate further figs. Using glasshouse populations, we examined the sex ratios and clutches laid by single foundresses of Kradibia tentacularis (Grandi) in their first and subsequent male figs of Ficus montana Blume, and how the probability of emergence and entering a second fig varied between seasons. A maximum of four figs were entered by any one foundress. Wingless foundresses were able to locate and enter figs up to 60 cm from the first fig they entered, but the probability of entry declined sharply with distance from that fig. The foundresses that re‐emerged produced slightly higher adult offspring totals than those that failed to re‐emerge. Clutch sizes of a single foundress in its first fig equalled those in all the subsequent figs combined, with clutch size per fig decreasing when more figs were entered. Smaller clutches had less female‐biased sex ratios. Figs were more numerous in summer than in winter, but the proportion of figs entered by only wingless foundresses remained unchanged. Movement between figs increases pollinator reproductive success in male figs, thereby encouraging foundresses that encounter a female tree to also move between and pollinate several female figs.     

Sexual differences in the attractiveness of figs to pollinators: females stay attractive for longer

1. Figs on male dioecious fig trees (Ficus, Moraceae) are breeding sites for pollinator fig wasps (Hymenoptera, Agaonidae), but figs on female plants are traps that produce only seeds. As the short‐lived fig wasps cannot reproduce in female figs, natural selection should favour individuals that avoid them. Several studies have failed to detect such discrimination, a result attributed to inter‐sexual mimicry and ‘selection to rush’ in the wasps, but their experiments failed to explicitly take into account fig age (how long they had been waiting to be pollinated). 2. We compared the relative attraction of male and female figs of known ages of the South East Asian Ficus montana Burm. f. to its pollina tor Liporrhopalum tentacularis Grandi and examined how the reproductive success of the plant and its pollinator change with the age of the figs. 3. Mean retention time for un‐pollinated figs on female plants was 16 days whereas in male figs it was 12 days. Female figs remained attractive for up to 2 weeks, although the wasps were less willing to enter older figs. After pollinator entry, receptivity continued for several days, lasting longer in figs entered by a single wasp. Consistent with abortion rates, attractiveness persisted longer in female figs. Older figs produced fewer fig wasp offspring, but similar numbers of seeds. 4. The sexual differences in floral longevity in F. montana may represent part of a previously un‐recognised reproductive strategy in some fig trees that allows male plants to ‘export’ pollinators while also maintaining a resident fig wasp population.     

Factors Influencing Realized Sex Ratios in Fig Wasps: Double Oviposition and Larval Mortalities

Pollinator fig wasps (Agaonidae) are a model system for studies of sex ratio evolution. They lay their eggs in galled ovules within figs. Only one adult emerges from each gall, suggesting that only one egg is always laid per ovule, but if double oviposition occurs then the assumption that adult (realised) sex ratios of fig wasps are representative of primary sex ratios may be violated. Many galls also fail to produce any wasps. If they initially contained eggs then differential mortality rates may also modify realized sex ratios. We investigated whether Kradibia (= Liporrhopalum) tentacularis foundresses in Ficus montana figs avoid laying in ovules that already contain eggs. Comparisons of oviposition frequencies and wasp emergence frequencies showed that most galls that failed to produce wasps will have had eggs laid in them, but few occupied ovules contained two eggs. Realised sex ratios therefore do not necessarily reflect primary sex ratios in this species, but double oviposition is not responsible.     

Putting your sons in the right place: the spatial distribution of fig wasp offspring inside figs

Abstract. 1. Pollinating fig wasps (Hymenoptera, Agaonidae) display sex ratio adjustment, producing less female‐biased combined sex ratios as the number of ovipositing females (foundresses) inside a fig increases. Because males have low mobility, the oviposition sites (galled ovules) chosen by each foundress are likely to have consequences for the mating structure of wasp populations within the figs. 2. In this study, the spatial location of male and female progeny of the pollinating fig wasp Liporrhopalum tentacularis developing within figs of its host plant Ficus montana was examined to investigate two questions: (i) are male and/or female wasp offspring clustered together or interspersed? and (ii) is their distribution affected by whether one or two foundresses are present? Microsatellite markers were used to identify the progeny of different foundresses in dual‐foundress figs. 3. More offspring developed in the central part of the figs, compared with the ostiolar and basal parts, irrespective of foundress number. Neither male nor female wasp offspring were clustered within a fig. 4. The sons of the second foundress to enter a fig were positioned at similar minimum distances to both sibling and non‐sibling females, whereas the sons of the first foundress were closer to their sibling females than to non‐sibling females. If male wasps mate predominantly with females in adjacent galls, then the positioning of sons by the second foundresses is beneficial for them both in terms of reduced sibling mating and because they are provided with ready access to the female progeny of the first foundress.     

Moving your sons to safety: galls containing male fig wasps expand into the centre of figs, away from enemies

Figs are the inflorescences of fig trees (Ficus spp., Moraceae). They are shaped like a hollow ball, lined on their inner surface by numerous tiny female flowers. Pollination is carried out by host-specific fig wasps (Agaonidae). Female pollinators enter the figs through a narrow entrance gate and once inside can walk around on a platform generated by the stigmas of the flowers. They lay their eggs into the ovules, via the stigmas and styles, and also gall the flowers, causing the ovules to expand and their pedicels to elongate. A single pollinator larva develops in each galled ovule. Numerous species of non-pollinating fig wasps (NPFW, belonging to other families of Chalcidoidea) also make use of galled ovules in the figs. Some initiate galls, others make use of pollinator-generated galls, killing pollinator larvae. Most NPFW oviposit from the outside of figs, making peripherally-located pollinator larvae more prone to attack. Style length variation is high among monoecious Ficus spp. and pollinators mainly oviposit into more centrally-located ovules, with shorter styles. Style length variation is lower in male (wasp-producing) figs of dioecious Ficus spp., making ovules equally vulnerable to attack by NPFW at the time that pollinators oviposit. We recorded the spatial distributions of galled ovules in mature male figs of the dioecious Ficus hirta in Southern China. The galls contained pollinators and three NPFW that kill them. Pollinators were concentrated in galls located towards the centre of the figs, NPFW towards the periphery. Due to greater pedicel elongation by male galls, male pollinators became located in more central galls than their females, and so were less likely to be attacked. This helps ensure that sufficient males survive, despite strongly female-biased sex ratios, and may be a consequence of the pollinator females laying mostly male eggs at the start of oviposition sequences.     

Parasitism of a pollinator fig wasp: mortalities are higher in figs with more pollinators,but are not related to local densities of figs

相似文献   

Variation in inflorescence size in a dioecious fig tree and its consequences for the plant and its pollinator fig wasp

The host-specific relationship between fig trees (Ficus) and their pollinator wasps (Agaonidae) is a classic case of obligate mutualism. Pollinators reproduce within highly specialised inflorescences (figs) of fig trees that depend on the pollinator offspring for the dispersal of their pollen. About half of all fig trees are functionally dioecious, with separate male and female plants responsible for separate sexual functions. Pollen and the fig wasps that disperse it are produced within male figs, whereas female figs produce only seeds. Figs vary greatly in size between different species, with female flower numbers varying from tens to many thousands. Within species, the number of female flowers present in each fig is potentially a major determinant of the numbers of pollinator offspring and seeds produced. We recorded variation in female flower numbers within male and female figs of the dioecious Ficus montana growing under controlled conditions, and assessed the sources and consequences of inflorescence size variation for the reproductive success of the plants and their pollinator (Kradibia tentacularis). Female flower numbers varied greatly within and between plants, as did the reproductive success of the plants, and their pollinators. The numbers of pollinator offspring in male figs and seeds in female figs were positively correlated with female flower numbers, but the numbers of male flowers and a parasitoid of the pollinator were not. The significant variation in flower number among figs produced by different individuals growing under uniform conditions indicates that there is a genetic influence on inflorescence size and that this character may be subject to selection.     

Adaptive phenology of Ficus subpisocarpa and Ficus caulocarpa in Taipei,Taiwan

Insect pollination is the main strategy used by Angiosperm plants to transport pollen to another individual. The interaction between entomophilous plants and their pollinators is often mutualistic, with many species pairs being interdependent. In obligate pollination mutualism, the plant relies on its partner for pollination, whereas the pollen vector relies on plant resources. In the mutualism between Ficus (Moraceae) and the fig wasps (Hymenoptera, Agaonidae), the plant provides oviposition sites to its exclusive pollinator, which has an extremely short lifespan (a maximum lifespan of few days). This study examined how fig trees maintain their associated pollinator populations by conducting a 45-month phenological survey of 27 and 64 trees belonging to the species Ficus caulocarpa and F. subpisocarpa in Taipei, Taiwan. The observations indicated that the trees produce figs year-round with no clear seasonal pattern, and are not affected by meteorological factors. On average, about 30% of the trees of both species were bearing figs during the survey. The duration of the fig development was longer during the winter-spring period than during the summer-fall period. The trees displayed strong asynchrony among trees in the population but each crop was synchronous within a tree. However, after wasp emergence, crops lost their synchrony with part of the figs ripening within few days whereas some figs only ripened eight weeks later for F. subpisocarpa and four weeks later for F. caulocarpa. This study also discusses the implications of fig frugivory and mutualism.     

Only pollinator fig wasps have males that collaborate to release their females from figs of an Asian fig tree

Male insects rarely collaborate with each other, but pollinator fig wasps (Hymenoptera: Agaonidae) are said to be an exception. Immature fig wasps feed on galled ovules located inside figs, the inflorescences of Ficus species (Moraceae). After mating, adult pollinator males chew communal exit-holes that allow mated females (which are often also their siblings) to escape. Figs also support non-pollinating fig wasps (NPFWs), some of which produce exit-holes independently. We determined whether collaboration between pollinator males (Kradibia tentacularis from Ficus montana) was necessary for the release of their females, and used the relationship between male numbers and likelihood of success to measure the extent of cooperation during exit-hole production. These attributes were then compared with those of an NPFW (Sycoscapter sp.) from the same host plant. Pollinators were more abundant than NPFW, but their more female-biased sex ratio meant male pollinator densities were only slightly higher. Individual males of both species could produce an exit-hole. Single males of the NPFW were just as successful as single male pollinators, but only male pollinators cooperated effectively, becoming more successful as their numbers increased. The lack of cooperation among NPFW may be linked to their earlier period of intense inter-male aggression.     

Phenological Adaptations in Ficus tikoua Exhibit Convergence with Unrelated Extra-Tropical Fig Trees

Flowering phenology is central to the ecology and evolution of most flowering plants. In highly-specific nursery pollination systems, such as that involving fig trees (Ficus species) and fig wasps (Agaonidae), any mismatch in timing has serious consequences because the plants must balance seed production with maintenance of their pollinator populations. Most fig trees are found in tropical or subtropical habitats, but the dioecious Chinese Ficus tikoua has a more northerly distribution. We monitored how its fruiting phenology has adapted in response to a highly seasonal environment. Male trees (where fig wasps reproduce) had one to three crops annually, whereas many seed-producing female trees produced only one fig crop. The timing of release of Ceratosolen fig wasps from male figs in late May and June was synchronized with the presence of receptive figs on female trees, at a time when there were few receptive figs on male trees, thereby ensuring seed set while allowing remnant pollinator populations to persist. F. tikoua phenology has converged with those of other (unrelated) northern Ficus species, but there are differences. Unlike F. carica in Europe, all F. tikoua male figs contain male flowers, and unlike F. pumila in China, but like F. carica, it is the second annual generation of adult wasps that pollinate female figs. The phenologies of all three temperate fig trees generate annual bottlenecks in the size of pollinator populations and for female F. tikoua also a shortage of fig wasps that results in many figs failing to be pollinated.     

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.     

Insect responses to host plant provision beyond natural boundaries: latitudinal and altitudinal variation in a Chinese fig wasp community

Many plants are grown outside their natural ranges. Plantings adjacent to native ranges provide an opportunity to monitor community assembly among associated insects and their parasitoids in novel environments, to determine whether gradients in species richness emerge and to examine their consequences for host plant reproductive success. We recorded the fig wasps (Chalcidoidea) associated with a single plant resource (ovules of Ficus microcarpa) along a 1200 km transect in southwest China that extended for 1000 km beyond the tree's natural northern range margin. The fig wasps included the tree's agaonid pollinator and other species that feed on the ovules or are their parasitoids. Phytophagous fig wasps (12 species) were more numerous than parasitoids (nine species). The proportion of figs occupied by fig wasps declined with increasing latitude, as did the proportion of utilized ovules in occupied figs. Species richness, diversity, and abundance of fig wasps also significantly changed along both latitudinal and altitudinal gradients. Parasitoids declined more steeply with latitude than phytophages. Seed production declined beyond the natural northern range margin, and at high elevation, because pollinator fig wasps became rare or absent. This suggests that pollinator climatic tolerances helped limit the tree's natural distribution, although competition with another species may have excluded pollinators at the highest altitude site. Isolation by distance may prevent colonization of northern sites by some fig wasps and act in combination with direct and host‐mediated climatic effects to generate gradients in community composition, with parasitoids inherently more sensitive because of declines in the abundance of potential hosts.     

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.     

Spatial variation in pollinator gall failure within figs of the gynodioecious Ficus hirta

Figs, the inflorescences of Ficus species (Moraceae), contain numerous uni-ovulate flowers. Male trees of gynodioecious Ficus have figs that support development of pollinator fig wasp offspring (Agaonidae) and rarely produce seeds. Pollinator larvae develop inside galled ovules that expand rapidly after eggs are laid to fill the available space. Galls that fail to support successful larval development can be abundant and failures may influence oviposition behavior and modify realized offspring sex ratios. We examined pollinator reproductive success in figs of the Asian Ficus hirta where we had allowed entry by either one or two foundresses and prevented attack by parasitoids. At the developmental stage when adult offspring were about to emerge from their galls, we recorded where in the figs their galls were located, the distributions of sons and daughters in the galls and whether galls that developed closest to the periphery of the figs were more likely to fail. Foundress number had an effect on gall location, but not total offspring numbers. No spatial variation in the distribution of male and female adult offspring was detected. Overall, over 25% of the galled ovaries failed to support offspring development, and failure rates were independent of foundress number. More peripheral galls were more likely to fail in figs entered by two foundresses. Gall location in gynodioecious figs is determined largely by the extent to which their basal pedicels expand after galling. Competition for nutrients between galls, with those developing shorter pedicels being at a disadvantage, may explain the results. If pedicel length is related to timing of oviposition, then pollinator eggs laid later are less likely to survive.     

Are nematodes costly to fig tree–fig wasp mutualists?

Most mutualisms are exploited by parasites, which must strike an evolutionary balance between virulence and long‐term persistence. Fig‐associated nematodes, living inside figs and dispersed by fig wasps, are thought to be exploiters of the fig–fig wasp mutualism. The life history of nematodes is synchronized with the fig development and adapted to particular developmental characteristics of figs. We expect host breeding systems (monoecious vs. gynodioecious figs) and seasonality to be central to this adaptation. However, the details of the adaptation are largely unknown. Here, we conducted the first field surveys on the prevalence of nematodes from monoecious Ficus microcarpa L.f. (Moraceae), gynodioecious Ficus hispida L.f., and their pollinating fig wasps in two seasons and two developmental stages of figs in Xishuangbanna, China. We followed this up by quantifying the effects of nematodes on fitness‐related traits on fig wasps (e.g., egg loads, pollen grains, and longevity) and fig trees (seed production) in gynodioecious F. hispida. The magnitude of nematode infection was compared between pre‐ and post‐dispersal pollinators to quantify the probability of nematodes being transported to new hosts. Our results showed that Ficophagus microcarpus (Nematoda: Aphelenchoididae) was the only nematode in F. microcarpa. In F. hispida, Martininema guangzhouensis (Nematoda: Aphelenchoididae) was the dominant nematode species, whereas Ficophagus centerae was rare. For both species of Ficus, rainy season and inter‐floral figs had higher rates of nematode infection than the dry‐hot season and receptive figs. Nematodes did not affect the number of pollen grains or egg loads of female wasps. We did not detect a correlation between seed production and nematode infection. However, carrying nematodes reduced the lifespan and dispersal ability of pollinator wasps, indicating higher rates of post‐emergence mortality in infected fig wasps. Severely infected fig wasps were likely ‘filtered out’, preventing the overexploitation of figs by wasps and stabilizing the interaction over evolutionary time.     

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.     

Can chemical signals,responsible for mutualistic partner encounter,promote the specific exploitation of nursery pollination mutualisms? – The case of figs and fig wasps

In nursery pollination mutualisms, where pollinators reproduce within the inflorescence they pollinate, floral scents often play a major role in advertizing host location and rewards for the pollinator. However, chemical messages emitted by the plant that are responsible for the encounter of mutualist partners can also be used by parasites of these mutualisms to locate their host. Each species of Ficus (Moraceae) is involved in an obligatory nursery pollination mutualism with usually one pollinating fig wasp (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Agaonidae). In this interaction, volatile compounds emitted by receptive figs are responsible for the attraction of their specific pollinator. However, a large and diverse community of non-pollinating chalcidoid wasps can also parasitize this mutualism. We investigated whether the chemical message emitted by figs to attract their pollinator can promote the host specificity of non-pollinating fig wasps. We analysed the volatile compounds emitted by receptive figs of three sympatric Ficus species, namely, Ficus hispida L., Ficus racemosa L., and Ficus tinctoria G. Forster, and tested the attraction of the pollinator of F. hispida ( Ceratosolen solmsi marchali Mayr), and of one species of non-pollinating fig wasp [ Philotrypesis pilosa Mayr (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Pteromalidae)] to scents emitted by receptive figs of these three Ficus species. Analysis of the volatile compounds emitted by receptive figs revealed that the three Ficus species could be clearly distinguished by their chemical composition. Behavioural bioassays performed in a Y-tube olfactometer showed that both pollinator and parasite were attracted only by the specific odour of F. hispida . These results suggest that the use by non-pollinating fig wasps of a specific chemical message produced by figs could limit host shifts by non-pollinating fig wasps.     

钝叶榕(Ficus curtipes)非传粉小蜂交配行为

榕树及其传粉榕小蜂繁殖上相互依存,被认为是生物界中协同进化时间最悠久,相互关系最密切的一对生物;在大多数榕树种类的隐头花序内,除了传粉榕小蜂外,还共存着多种非传粉小蜂,它们的繁殖行为直接影响着榕树和传粉榕小蜂的繁殖和互惠稳定。钝叶榕(Ficus curtipes Corner),是一种雌雄同株的绞杀性榕树。研究在西双版纳热带植物园里共收集钝叶榕100个隐头果内的榕小蜂,获得9493号标本;其中,包括1种传粉小蜂和5种非传粉小蜂,钝叶榕传粉小蜂Eupristina sp.占总数的4466%,杨氏榕树金小蜂Diaziella yangi 占46.13%,而其它4种非传粉小蜂（Lipothymus sp., Sycobia sp., Philotrypesis sp.和Sycoscopter sp.）仅占9.20%。前3种榕小蜂雌蜂进到果腔产卵,其余3种在果外产卵。观测23个钝叶榕榕果出蜂情况发现,6种榕小蜂在钝叶榕隐头花序内遵循严格的羽化出蜂顺序,首先是Sycobia sp.,次之是Lipothymus sp.,再次之是杨氏榕树金小蜂,最后是钝叶榕传粉小蜂、Philotrypesis sp.和Sycoscopter sp.。5种非传粉小蜂的交配场所与雄蜂翅型无关,雄蜂有翅型的杨氏榕树金小蜂大部分交配在果内完成,而且它们的雄蜂为争夺交配机会存在激烈的打斗行为;雄蜂无翅型的Lipothymus sp.有部分雄蜂爬出隐头果,在果壁和附近的叶片背面交配;雄蜂有翅型的Sycobia sp.,其所有交配都发生在果外;Philotrypesis sp.和Sycoscopter sp. 雄蜂均无翅,它们的交配全发生在果内。局域配偶竞争使榕小蜂性比偏雌,杨氏榕树金小蜂雄蜂虽然有翅,但大部分交配发生在榕果内,这将影响其最佳的性比率。因此,依赖雄蜂翅型并不能很好地预测榕小蜂的交配场所和性比率。