Cargando…

More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps

BACKGROUND: The obligate mutualism between fig trees (Ficus, Moraceae) and pollinating fig wasps (Agaonidae) is a model system for studying co-evolution due to its perceived extreme specificity, but recent studies have reported a number of examples of trees pollinated by more than one fig wasp or sh...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yu, Hui, Liao, Yaolin, Cheng, Yufen, Jia, Yongxia, Compton, Stephen G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Singapore 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34626257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40529-021-00323-8
_version_ 1784580837614813184
author Yu, Hui
Liao, Yaolin
Cheng, Yufen
Jia, Yongxia
Compton, Stephen G.
author_facet Yu, Hui
Liao, Yaolin
Cheng, Yufen
Jia, Yongxia
Compton, Stephen G.
author_sort Yu, Hui
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The obligate mutualism between fig trees (Ficus, Moraceae) and pollinating fig wasps (Agaonidae) is a model system for studying co-evolution due to its perceived extreme specificity, but recent studies have reported a number of examples of trees pollinated by more than one fig wasp or sharing pollinators with other trees. This will make the potential of pollen flow between species and hybridization more likely though only few fig hybrids in nature have been found. We reared pollinator fig wasps from figs of 13 Chinese fig tree species and established their identity using genetic methods in order to investigate the extent to which they were supporting more than one species of pollinator (co-pollinator). RESULTS: Our results showed (1) pollinator sharing was frequent among closely-related dioecious species (where pollinator offspring and seeds develop on different trees); (2) that where two pollinator species were developing in figs of one host species there was usually one fig wasp with prominent rate than the other. An exception was F. triloba, where its two pollinators were equally abundant; (3) the extent of co-pollinator within one fig species is related to the dispersal ability of them which is stronger in dioecious figs, especially in small species. CONCLUSIONS: Our results gave more examples to the breakdown of extreme specificity, which suggest that host expansion events where pollinators reproduce in figs other than those of their usual hosts are not uncommon among fig wasps associated with dioecious hosts. Because closely related trees typically have closely related pollinators that have a very similar appearance, the extent of pollinator-sharing has probably been underestimated. Any pollinators that enter female figs carrying heterospecific pollen could potentially generate hybrid seed, and the extent of hybridization and its significance may also have been underestimated. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40529-021-00323-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8502184
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Singapore
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85021842021-10-22 More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps Yu, Hui Liao, Yaolin Cheng, Yufen Jia, Yongxia Compton, Stephen G. Bot Stud Original Article BACKGROUND: The obligate mutualism between fig trees (Ficus, Moraceae) and pollinating fig wasps (Agaonidae) is a model system for studying co-evolution due to its perceived extreme specificity, but recent studies have reported a number of examples of trees pollinated by more than one fig wasp or sharing pollinators with other trees. This will make the potential of pollen flow between species and hybridization more likely though only few fig hybrids in nature have been found. We reared pollinator fig wasps from figs of 13 Chinese fig tree species and established their identity using genetic methods in order to investigate the extent to which they were supporting more than one species of pollinator (co-pollinator). RESULTS: Our results showed (1) pollinator sharing was frequent among closely-related dioecious species (where pollinator offspring and seeds develop on different trees); (2) that where two pollinator species were developing in figs of one host species there was usually one fig wasp with prominent rate than the other. An exception was F. triloba, where its two pollinators were equally abundant; (3) the extent of co-pollinator within one fig species is related to the dispersal ability of them which is stronger in dioecious figs, especially in small species. CONCLUSIONS: Our results gave more examples to the breakdown of extreme specificity, which suggest that host expansion events where pollinators reproduce in figs other than those of their usual hosts are not uncommon among fig wasps associated with dioecious hosts. Because closely related trees typically have closely related pollinators that have a very similar appearance, the extent of pollinator-sharing has probably been underestimated. Any pollinators that enter female figs carrying heterospecific pollen could potentially generate hybrid seed, and the extent of hybridization and its significance may also have been underestimated. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40529-021-00323-8. Springer Singapore 2021-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8502184/ /pubmed/34626257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40529-021-00323-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Yu, Hui
Liao, Yaolin
Cheng, Yufen
Jia, Yongxia
Compton, Stephen G.
More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
title More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
title_full More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
title_fullStr More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
title_full_unstemmed More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
title_short More examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
title_sort more examples of breakdown the 1:1 partner specificity between figs and fig wasps
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34626257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40529-021-00323-8
work_keys_str_mv AT yuhui moreexamplesofbreakdownthe11partnerspecificitybetweenfigsandfigwasps
AT liaoyaolin moreexamplesofbreakdownthe11partnerspecificitybetweenfigsandfigwasps
AT chengyufen moreexamplesofbreakdownthe11partnerspecificitybetweenfigsandfigwasps
AT jiayongxia moreexamplesofbreakdownthe11partnerspecificitybetweenfigsandfigwasps
AT comptonstepheng moreexamplesofbreakdownthe11partnerspecificitybetweenfigsandfigwasps