Let the Right One In: A Microeconomic Approach to Partner Choice in Mutualisms

One of the main problems impeding the evolution of cooperation is partner choice. When information is asymmetric (the quality of a potential partner is known only to himself), it may seem that partner choice is not possible without signaling. Many mutualisms, however, exist without signaling, and the mechanisms by which hosts might select the right partners are unclear. Here we propose a general mechanism of partner choice, “screening,” that is similar to the economic theory of mechanism design. Imposing the appropriate costs and rewards may induce the informed individuals to screen themselves according to their types and therefore allow a noninformed individual to establish associations with the correct partners in the absence of signaling. Several types of biological symbioses are good candidates for screening, including bobtail squid, ant‐plants, gut microbiomes, and many animal and plant species that produce reactive oxygen species. We describe a series of diagnostic tests for screening. Screening games can apply to the cases where by‐products, partner fidelity feedback, or host sanctions do not apply, therefore explaining the evolution of mutualism in systems where it is impossible for potential symbionts to signal their cooperativeness beforehand and where the host does not punish symbiont misbehavior.

[1]  A. Young.  Contract Theory , 2011 .

[2]  Douglas W. Yu,et al.  Economic contract theory tests models of mutualism , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  C. Lebrilla,et al.  Human milk glycobiome and its impact on the infant gastrointestinal microbiota , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  M. S. Hunter,et al.  Extraordinarily widespread and fantastically complex: comparative biology of endosymbiotic bacterial and fungal mutualists of insects. , 2010, Ecology letters.

[5]  A. K. Glyan’ko,et al.  Reactive oxygen and nitrogen species in legume-rhizobial symbiosis: A review , 2010, Applied Biochemistry and Microbiology.

[6]  Marco Archetti,et al.  The volunteer's dilemma and the optimal size of a social group. , 2009, Journal of theoretical biology.

[7]  Fiona S. L. Brinkman,et al.  The Association of Virulence Factors with Genomic Islands , 2009, PloS one.

[8]  M. Archetti,et al.  Cooperation as a volunteer’s dilemma and the strategy of conflict in public goods games , 2009, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[9]  L. Clement,et al.  Divergent investment strategies of Acacia myrmecophytes and the coexistence of mutualists and exploiters , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  G. Karnam,et al.  lac Repressor Is an Antivirulence Factor of Salmonella enterica: Its Role in the Evolution of Virulence in Salmonella , 2009, PloS one.

[11]  G. Debout,et al.  Dynamics of species coexistence: maintenance of a plant‐ant competitive metacommunity , 2009 .

[12]  D. Gordon,et al.  The intertwined population biology of two Amazonian myrmecophytes and their symbiotic ants. , 2009, Ecology.

[13]  K. Heath,et al.  Stabilizing Mechanisms in a Legume-Rhizobium Mutualism , 2009, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[14]  S. V. Nyholm,et al.  Recognition between symbiotic Vibrio fischeri and the haemocytes of Euprymna scolopes. , 2009, Environmental microbiology.

[15]  I. Lasa,et al.  Killing niche competitors by remote-control bacteriophage induction , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  J. Olivares,et al.  Mutualism versus pathogenesis: the give‐and‐take in plant–bacteria interactions , 2008, Cellular microbiology.

[17]  Broome,et al.  Literature cited , 1924, A Guide to the Carnivores of Central America.

[18]  J. Olivares,et al.  Mutualism versus pathogenesis: the give‐and‐take in plant–bacteria interactions , 2008 .

[19]  M. McFall-Ngai.  Hawaiian bobtail squid , 2008, Current Biology.

[20]  J. Downie,et al.  Coordinating nodule morphogenesis with rhizobial infection in legumes. , 2008, Annual review of plant biology.

[21]  D. Relman,et al.  An ecological and evolutionary perspective on human–microbe mutualism and disease , 2007, Nature.

[22]  Douglas W. Yu,et al.  Protection in an ant–plant mutualism: an adaptation or a sensory trap? , 2007, Animal Behaviour.

[23]  George A. Akerlof,et al.  The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism , 1970 .

[24]  P. Dasgupta,et al.  Equilibrium in Competitive Insurance Markets : An Essay on the Economics of Imperfect Information , 2007 .

[25]  Douglas W. Yu,et al.  Selection for protection in an ant–plant mutualism: host sanctions, host modularity, and the principal–agent game , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[26]  C. Pélabon,et al.  Phenotypic selection on dalechampia blossoms: honest signaling affects pollination success , 2005 .

[27]  Peter Hammerstein,et al.  The second wave of evolutionary economics in biology. , 2005, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[28]  M. Frederickson.  Ant species confer different partner benefits on two neotropical myrmecophytes , 2005, Oecologia.

[29]  M. McFall-Ngai,et al.  NO means ‘yes’ in the squid‐vibrio symbiosis: nitric oxide (NO) during the initial stages of a beneficial association , 2004, Cellular microbiology.

[30]  D. Levey,et al.  How plant¿animal interactions signal new insights in communication , 2004 .

[31]  S. V. Nyholm,et al.  The winnowing: establishing the squid–vibrio symbiosis , 2004, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[32]  J. Bull,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation , 2004, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[33]  C. Tillberg.  SHORT COMMUNICATION Cordia gerascanthus (Boraginaceae) produces stem domatia , 2004, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[34]  U. Mueller,et al.  Symbiont choice in a fungus-growing ant (Attini, Formicidae) , 2004 .

[35]  E. Ruby,et al.  We Get By with a Little Help from Our (Little) Friends , 2004, Science.

[36]  Herbert Schmidt,et al.  Pathogenicity Islands in Bacterial Pathogenesis , 2004, Clinical Microbiology Reviews.

[37]  E. Bruna,et al.  Interspecific variation in the defensive responses of obligate plant-ants: experimental tests and consequences for herbivory , 2004, Oecologia.

[38]  D. Tilman,et al.  Fungal endophytes limit pathogen damage in a tropical tree , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[39]  D. McKey,et al.  Protective ant-plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. , 2003 .

[40]  J. Boomsma,et al.  The effect of metapleural gland secretion on the growth of a mutualistic bacterium on the cuticle of leaf-cutting ants , 2003, Naturwissenschaften.

[41]  S. V. Nyholm,et al.  Dominance of Vibrio fischeri in Secreted Mucus outside the Light Organ of Euprymna scolopes: the First Site of Symbiont Specificity , 2003, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[42]  D. Davidson,et al.  Explaining the Abundance of Ants in Lowland Tropical Rainforest Canopies , 2003, Science.

[43]  Stuart A. West,et al.  Sanctions and mutualism stability: when should less beneficial mutualists be tolerated? , 2002 .

[44]  S. West,et al.  Sanctions and mutualism stability: why do rhizobia fix nitrogen? , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[45]  C. Andary,et al.  Plant lock and ant key: pairwise coevolution of an exclusion filter in an ant–plant mutualism , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[46]  Douglas W. Yu,et al.  AN EMPIRICAL MODEL OF SPECIES COEXISTENCE IN A SPATIALLY STRUCTURED ENVIRONMENT , 2001 .

[47]  Douglas W. Yu.  Parasites of mutualisms , 2001 .

[48]  Edward G. Ruby,et al.  Vibrio fischeri lux Genes Play an Important Role in Colonization and Development of the Host Light Organ , 2000, Journal of bacteriology.

[49]  K. Visick,et al.  An Exclusive Contract: Specificity in the Vibrio fischeri-Euprymna scolopes Partnership , 2000, Journal of bacteriology.

[50]  E. Ruby,et al.  Oxygen-utilizing reactions and symbiotic colonization of the squid light organ by Vibrio fischeri. , 1999, Trends in microbiology.

[51]  Andrea L. Small,et al.  Halide peroxidase in tissues that interact with bacteria in the host squid Euprymna scolopes , 1999, Journal of cellular biochemistry.

[52]  EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES OF SPECIES-SPECIFICITY IN CECROPIA–ANT RELATIONSHIPS , 1997 .

[53]  A. Møller,et al.  Bumblebee preference for symmetrical flowers. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[54]  D. Davidson,et al.  Antiherbivore defenses of myrmecophytic Cecropia under different light regimes , 1994 .

[55]  E. Ruby,et al.  Effect of the Squid Host on the Abundance and Distribution of Symbiotic Vibrio fischeri in Nature , 1994, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[56]  Lawrence E. Blume,et al.  Mathematics for Economists , 1994 .

[57]  J. Bull,et al.  Distinguishing mechanisms for the evolution of co-operation. , 1991, Journal of theoretical biology.

[58]  A. Grafen.  Biological signals as handicaps. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[59]  H. Howe,et al.  INTERACTION AND COEVOLUTION. , 1984, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[60]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[61]  S. Risch,et al.  Mutualism in which ants must be present before plants produce food bodies , 1981, Nature.

[62]  Joseph E. Stiglitz,et al.  Monopoly, Non-linear Pricing and Imperfect Information: The Insurance Market , 1977 .

[63]  M. Spence.  Job Market Signaling , 1973 .