Cargando…
Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community?
Mutualism benefits partner species, and theory predicts these partnerships can affect the abundance, diversity, and composition of partner and non‐partner species. We used 16 years of monitoring data to determine the ant partner species of tree cholla cacti (Cylindropuntia imbricata), which reward a...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8796954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35127034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8524 |
_version_ | 1784641432872550400 |
---|---|
author | Donald, Marion L. Miller, Tom E. X. |
author_facet | Donald, Marion L. Miller, Tom E. X. |
author_sort | Donald, Marion L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Mutualism benefits partner species, and theory predicts these partnerships can affect the abundance, diversity, and composition of partner and non‐partner species. We used 16 years of monitoring data to determine the ant partner species of tree cholla cacti (Cylindropuntia imbricata), which reward ants with extrafloral nectar in exchange for anti‐herbivore defense. These long‐term data revealed one dominant ant partner (Liometopum apiculatum) and two less common partners (Crematogaster opuntiae and Forelius pruinosus). We then used short‐term characterization of the terrestrial ant community by pitfall trapping to sample partner and non‐partner ant species across ten plots of varying cactus density. We found that the dominant ant partner tended a higher proportion cacti in plots of higher cactus density, and was also found at higher occurrence within the pitfall traps in higher density plots, suggesting a strong positive feedback that promotes ant partner occurrence where plant partners are available. Despite the strong association and increased partner occurrence, ant community‐wide effects from this mutualism appear limited. Of the common ant species, the occurrence of a single non‐partner ant species was negatively associated with cactus density and with the increased presence of L. apiculatum. Additionally, the composition and diversity of the ant community in our plots were insensitive to cactus density variation, indicating that positive effects of the mutualism on the dominant ant partner did not have cascading impacts on the ant community. This study provides novel evidence that exclusive mutualisms, even those with a strong positive feedback, may be limited in the scope of their community‐level effects. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8796954 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87969542022-02-04 Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? Donald, Marion L. Miller, Tom E. X. Ecol Evol Research Articles Mutualism benefits partner species, and theory predicts these partnerships can affect the abundance, diversity, and composition of partner and non‐partner species. We used 16 years of monitoring data to determine the ant partner species of tree cholla cacti (Cylindropuntia imbricata), which reward ants with extrafloral nectar in exchange for anti‐herbivore defense. These long‐term data revealed one dominant ant partner (Liometopum apiculatum) and two less common partners (Crematogaster opuntiae and Forelius pruinosus). We then used short‐term characterization of the terrestrial ant community by pitfall trapping to sample partner and non‐partner ant species across ten plots of varying cactus density. We found that the dominant ant partner tended a higher proportion cacti in plots of higher cactus density, and was also found at higher occurrence within the pitfall traps in higher density plots, suggesting a strong positive feedback that promotes ant partner occurrence where plant partners are available. Despite the strong association and increased partner occurrence, ant community‐wide effects from this mutualism appear limited. Of the common ant species, the occurrence of a single non‐partner ant species was negatively associated with cactus density and with the increased presence of L. apiculatum. Additionally, the composition and diversity of the ant community in our plots were insensitive to cactus density variation, indicating that positive effects of the mutualism on the dominant ant partner did not have cascading impacts on the ant community. This study provides novel evidence that exclusive mutualisms, even those with a strong positive feedback, may be limited in the scope of their community‐level effects. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8796954/ /pubmed/35127034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8524 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Donald, Marion L. Miller, Tom E. X. Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
title | Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
title_full | Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
title_fullStr | Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
title_full_unstemmed | Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
title_short | Does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
title_sort | does ant–plant mutualism have spillover effects on the non‐partner ant community? |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8796954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35127034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8524 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT donaldmarionl doesantplantmutualismhavespillovereffectsonthenonpartnerantcommunity AT millertomex doesantplantmutualismhavespillovereffectsonthenonpartnerantcommunity |