4.7 Article

Evolutionary stability of mutualism: interspecific population regulation as an evolutionarily stable strategy

Journal

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 271, Issue 1550, Pages 1807-1814

Publisher

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2789

Keywords

fruit abortion; hermaphrodite; pollination; population dynamics; resource trade-offs; sex allocation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Interspecific mutualisms are often vulnerable to instability because low benefit: cost ratios can rapidly lead to extinction or to the conversion of mutualism to parasite-host or predator-prey interactions. We hypothesize that the evolutionary stability of mutualism can depend on how benefits and costs to one mutualist vary with the population density of its partner, and that stability can be maintained if a mutualist can influence demographic rates and regulate the population density of its partner. We test this hypothesis in a model of mutualism with key features of senita cactus (Pachycereus schottii) - senita moth (Upiga virescens) interactions, in which benefits of pollination and costs of larval seed consumption to plant fitness depend on pollinator density. We show that plants can maximize their fitness by allocating resources to the production of excess flowers at the expense of fruit. Fruit abortion resulting from excess flower production reduces pre-adult survival of the pollinating seed-consumer, and maintains its density beneath a threshold that would destabilize the mutualism. Such a strategy of excess flower production and fruit abortion is convergent and evolutionarily stable against invasion by cheater plants that produce few flowers and abort few to no fruit. This novel mechanism of achieving evolutionarily stable mutualism, namely interspecific population regulation, is qualitatively different from other mechanisms invoking partner choice or selective rewards, and may be a general process that helps to preserve mutualistic interactions in nature.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available