An experimental, behavioral, and chemical analysis of food limitations in mutualistic Crematogaster ant symbionts inhabiting Macaranga host plants

Abstract Obligate mutualistic plant–ants are often constrained by their plant partner's capacity to provide resources. However, despite this limitation, some ant partners actively reject potential prey items and instead drop them from the plant rather than consuming them, leaving the ants entirely reliant on host plant‐provided food, including that provided indirectly by the symbiotic scale insects that ants tend inside the plants. This dependency potentially increases the efficiency of these ants in defending their host. We hypothesize that if this ant behavior was beneficial to the symbiosis, prey rejection by ants would be observed across multiple plant host species. We also hypothesize that plant‐provided food items and symbiotic scale insects from other ant plants should be rejected. We address these hypotheses in the Crematogaster ant–Macaranga plant system, in which plants provide living space and food, while ants protect plants from herbivory. We observed food acceptance and rejection behavior across five ant species and three plant host species. Ants were offered three types of food: termites as a surrogate herbivore, symbiotic scale insects, and nutritious food bodies (FB) produced by different host plant species. The unique ant species living in M. winkleri was the most likely to reject food items not provided by the plant species, followed by ants in M. glandibracteolata, while ants in M. pearsonii accepted most items offered to them. Using stable isotopes, chemical cues, and proteomic analyses, we demonstrate that this behavior was not related to differences between plant species in nutritional quality or composition of FB. Isotopic signatures revealed that certain species are primary consumers but other ant species can be secondary consumers even where surrogate herbivores are rejected, although these values varied depending on the ant developmental stage and plant species. Macaranga pearsonii and M. glandibracteolata, the two most closely related plant species, had most similar surface chemical cues of FB. However, M. glandibracteolata had strongest differences in food body nutritional content, isotopic signatures, and protein composition from either of the other two plant species studied. Taken together we believe our results point toward potential host coercion of symbiont ants by plants in the genus Macaranga Thouars (Euphorbiaceae).

[1]  Kohske Takahashi,et al.  Welcome to the Tidyverse , 2019, J. Open Source Softw..

[2]  A. Andersen,et al.  Different trophic groups of arboreal ants show differential responses to resource supplementation in a neotropical savanna , 2019, Oecologia.

[3]  Corrie S. Moreau,et al.  Ant–plant interactions evolved through increasing interdependence , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  M. Hossaert-McKey,et al.  Pollination along an elevational gradient mediated both by floral scent and pollinator compatibility in the fig and fig‐wasp mutualism , 2018 .

[5]  D. Grasso,et al.  Nectar in Plant–Insect Mutualistic Relationships: From Food Reward to Partner Manipulation , 2018, Front. Plant Sci..

[6]  Daniel Lüdecke,et al.  ggeffects: Tidy Data Frames of Marginal Effects from Regression Models , 2018, J. Open Source Softw..

[7]  I. Kaloshian,et al.  Promises and challenges in insect–plant interactions , 2018 .

[8]  Megan E Frederickson,et al.  Mutualisms Are Not on the Verge of Breakdown. , 2017, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[9]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  INTEGRATION OF SCALE INSECTS (HEMIPTERA: COCCIDAE) IN THE SOUTH-EAST ASIAN ANT-PLANT (CREMATOGASTER (FORMICIDAE)- MACARANGA (EUPHORBIACEAE)) SYSTEM. , 2016 .

[10]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  Taxonomic Revision of the Obligate Plant-Ants of the Genus Crematogaster Lund (Hymenoptera: Formicidae: Myrmicinae), Associated with Macaranga Thouars (Euphorbiaceae) on Borneo and the Malay Peninsula , 2016 .

[11]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  Nematode associates and bacteria in ant-tree symbioses , 2016, Symbiosis.

[12]  N. Bazihizina,et al.  Extrafloral-nectar-based partner manipulation in plant–ant relationships , 2015, AoB PLANTS.

[13]  M. Frederickson,et al.  Current issues in the evolutionary ecology of ant-plant symbioses. , 2014, The New phytologist.

[14]  A. Svatoš,et al.  Partner manipulation stabilises a horizontally transmitted mutualism. , 2014, Ecology letters.

[15]  P. V. Van Welzen,et al.  Dated Phylogenies of the Sister Genera Macaranga and Mallotus (Euphorbiaceae): Congruence in Historical Biogeographic Patterns? , 2014, PloS one.

[16]  M. Heil,et al.  Stabilizing Mutualisms Threatened by Exploiters: New Insights from Ant–Plant Research , 2013 .

[17]  A. Svatoš,et al.  Exclusive rewards in mutualisms: ant proteases and plant protease inhibitors create a lock–key system to protect Acacia food bodies from exploitation , 2013, Molecular ecology.

[18]  D. Phillips,et al.  Bayesian stable isotope mixing models , 2012, 1209.6457.

[19]  Lenore Fahrig,et al.  A large-scale forest fragmentation experiment: the Stability of Altered Forest Ecosystems Project , 2011, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  The diversity of ant-associated black yeasts: insights into a newly discovered world of symbiotic interactions. , 2011, Fungal Biology.

[21]  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.

[22]  S. Morand,et al.  Ant-plant mutualisms should be viewed as symbiotic communities , 2009, Plant signaling & behavior.

[23]  Martin J. Mueller,et al.  Nutritional upgrading for omnivorous carpenter ants by the endosymbiont Blochmannia , 2007, BMC Biology.

[24]  B. Fiala,et al.  Chemical composition of leaf volatiles in Macaranga species (Euphorbiaceae) and their potential role as olfactory cues in host-localization of foundress queens of specific ant partners , 2006 .

[25]  B. Fiala,et al.  AFLP analysis of phylogenetic relationships among myrmecophytic species of Macaranga(Euphorbiaceae) and their allies , 2004, Plant Systematics and Evolution.

[26]  D. Read,et al.  Changing partners in the dark: isotopic and molecular evidence of ectomycorrhizal liaisons between forest orchids and trees , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

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

[28]  Walter Federle,et al.  Pruning of host plant neighbours as defence against enemy ant invasions: Crematogaster ant partners of Macaranga protected by "wax barriers" prune less than their congeners , 2002, Oecologia.

[29]  S. Rinaldi,et al.  Cheating and the evolutionary stability of mutualisms , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  T. Itioka,et al.  Effects of food rewards offered by ant–plant Macaranga on the colony size of ants , 2001, Ecological Research.

[31]  R. Yamaoka,et al.  Chemical Recognition of Partner Plant Species by Foundress Ant Queens in Macaranga–Crematogaster Myrmecophytism , 2001, Journal of Chemical Ecology.

[32]  B. Fiala,et al.  Trade-Off Between Chemical and Biotic Antiherbivore Defense in the South East Asian Plant Genus Macaranga , 2001, Journal of Chemical Ecology.

[33]  B. Fiala,et al.  Nutrient availability and indirect (biotic) defence in a Malaysian ant-plant , 2001, Oecologia.

[34]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  On benefits of indirect defence: short- and long-term studies of antiherbivore protection via mutualistic ants , 2001, Oecologia.

[35]  R. Evans,et al.  Carbon and nitrogen isotopes trace nutrient exchange in an ant-plant mutualism , 2000, Oecologia.

[36]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  Diversity, evolutionary specialization and geographic distribution of a mutualistic ant-plant complex: Macaranga and Crematogaster in South East Asia , 1999 .

[37]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  The soft scale (Coccidae) associates of Malaysian ant-plants , 1998, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[38]  B. Fiala,et al.  Chemical contents of Macaranga food bodies: adaptations to their role in ant attraction and nutrition , 1998 .

[39]  Markus Riederer,et al.  Slippery ant-plants and skilful climbers: selection and protection of specific ant partners by epicuticular wax blooms in Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae) , 1997, Oecologia.

[40]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  Food bodies and their significance for obligate ant-association in the tree genus Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae) , 1992 .

[41]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  Studies on the south east Asian ant-plant associationCrematogaster borneensis/Macaranga: Adaptations of the ant partner , 1990, Insectes Sociaux.

[42]  Macaranga Euphorbiaceae INTEGRATION OF SCALE INSECTS (HEMIPTERA: COCCIDAE) IN THE SOUTH-EAST ASIAN ANT-PLANT (CREMATOGASTER (FORMICIDAE)- , 2014 .

[43]  N. Blüthgen,et al.  Stable isotopes: past and future in exposing secrets of ant nutrition (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) , 2010 .

[44]  T. Itioka,et al.  Phylogeography of the Coccus scale insects inhabiting myrmecophytic Macaranga plants in Southeast Asia , 2009, Population Ecology.

[45]  U. Maschwitz,et al.  The triple alliance: how a plant-ant, living in an ant-plant, acquires the third partner, a scale insect , 2005, Insectes Sociaux.