Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The reproductive biology of the myrmecophyte, Hirtella physophora, and the limitation of negative interactions between pollinators and ants

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Arthropod-Plant Interactions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Myrmecophytism occurs in plants that offer ants a nesting space and, often, food rewards in exchange for protection from predators and competitors. Such biotic protection by ants can, however, interfere with the activity of pollinators leading to potential negative consequences for the plant’s reproduction. In this study, we focused on the association between the understory myrmecophyte, Hirtella physophora (Chrysobalanaceae), and its obligate ant partner, Allomerus decemarticulatus (Myrmicinae). We investigated the reproductive biology of H. physophora and the putative mechanisms that may limit ant–pollinator conflict. Our results show that H. physophora is an obligate outcrosser, self-incompatible, and potentially insect-pollinated species. The reproduction of H. physophora relies entirely on pollen transfer by pollinators that are likely quite specific. Potential interference between flower-visiting insects during pollination may also be lessened by a spatial and temporal segregation of ant and pollinator activities, thus enabling pollen transfer and fruit production.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altshuler DL (1999) Novel interactions of non-pollinating ants with pollinators and fruit consumers in a tropical forest. Oecologia 119:600–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arista M, Oliveira PE, Gibbs PE, Talavera S (1997) Pollination and breeding system of two co-occurring Hirtella species (Chrysobalanaceae) in Central Brazil. Bot Acta 110:496–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Maechler M (2009) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. (R package version 0999375-32 ed)

  • Bullock SH (1985) Breeding systems in the flora of a tropical deciduous forest in Mexico. Biotropica 17:287–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cembrowski AR, Thomson TMG, Frederickson ME (2014) Ants and ant scent reduce bumblebee pollination of artificial flowers. Am Nat 183:133–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cruden RW (1977) Pollen–ovule ratios: a conservative indicator of breeding systems in flowering plants. Evolution 31:32–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dejean A, Solano P, Belin-Depoux M, Cerdan P, Corbara B (2001) Predatory behavior of patrolling Allomerus decemarticulatus workers (Formicidae; Myrmicinae) on their associated host plant. Sociobiology 38:571–578

    Google Scholar 

  • Dejean A, Solano PJ, Ayrolles J, Corbara B, Orivel J (2005) Arboreal ants build traps to capture prey. Nature 434:973

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton EM, Frederickson ME (2012) Why ant pollination is rare: new evidence and implications of the antibiotic hypothesis. Arthropod Plant Interact 6:561–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez F (2007) The myrmicine ant genus Allomerus Mayr (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Caldasia 29:159–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederickson ME (2009) Conflict over reproduction in an ant–plant symbiosis: why Allomerus octoarticulatus ants sterilize Cordia nodosa trees. Am Nat 173:675–681

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gaume L, Zacharias M, Borges RM (2005) Ant–plant conflicts and a novel case of castration parasitism in a myrmecophyte. Evol Ecol Res 7:435–452

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghazoul J (2001) Can floral repellents pre-empt potential ant–plant conflicts? Ecol Lett 4:295–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grangier J, Dejean A, Malé PJG, Orivel J (2008a) Indirect defense in a highly specific ant–plant mutualism. Naturwissenschaften 96:57–63

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grangier J, Orivel J, Negrini M, Dejean A (2008b) Low intraspecific aggressiveness in two obligate plant–ant species. Insect Soc 55:238–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grangier J, Dejean A, Malé PJG, Solano PJ, Orivel J (2009) Mechanisms driving the specificity of a myrmecophyte–ant association. Biol J Linn Soc 97:90–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heil M, McKey D (2003) Protective ant–plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:425–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izzo TJ, Vasconcelos HL (2002) Cheating the cheater: domatia loss minimizes the effects of ant castration in an Amazonian ant–plant. Oecologia 133:200–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junker R, Chung AYC, Bluthgen N (2007) Interaction between flowers, ants and pollinators: additional evidence for floral repellence against ants. Ecol Res 22:665–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lack A (1978) The ecology of the flowers of the savanna tree Maranthes polyandra and their visitors, with particular reference to bats. J Ecol 66:287–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson BMH, Barrett SCH (2000) A comparative analysis of pollen limitation in flowering plants. Biol J Linn Soc 69:503–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leroy C, Jauneau A, Quilichini A, Dejean A, Orivel J (2008) Comparison between the anatomical and morphological structure of leaf blades and foliar domatia in the ant–plant Hirtella physophora (Chrysobalanaceae). Ann Bot 101:501–507

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leroy C, Jauneau A, Quilichini A, Dejean A, Orivel J (2010) Comparative structure and ontogeny of the foliar domatia in three neotropical myrmecophytes. Am J Bot 97:557–565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leroy C, Séjalon-Delmas N, Jauneau A, Ruiz-González MX, Gryta H, Jargeat P, Corbara B, Dejean A, Orivel J (2011) Trophic mediation by a fungus in an ant–plant mutualism. J Ecol 99:583–590

    Google Scholar 

  • Malé PJG, Leroy C, Dejean A, Quilichini A, Orivel J (2012) An ant symbiont directly and indirectly limits its host plant’s reproductive success. Evol Ecol 26:55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malé PJG, Ferdy JB, Leroy C, Roux O, Lauth J, Avilez A, Dejean A, Quilichini A, Orivel J (2014) Retaliation in response to castration promotes a low level of virulence in an ant–plant mutualism. Evol Biol 41:22–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Ness JH (2006) A mutualism’s indirect costs: the most aggressive plant bodyguards also deter pollinators. Oikos 113:506–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orivel J, Lambs L, Malé PJG, Leroy C, Grangier J, Otto T, Quilichini A, Dejean A (2011) Dynamics of the association between a long-lived understory myrmecophyte and its specific associated ants. Oecologia 165:369–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulino-Neto HF (2007) Pollination and breeding system of Couepia uiti (Mart. And Zucc.) Benth (Chrysobalanaceae) in the Pantanal da Nhecolândia. Braz J Biol 67:715–719

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prance GT, Sothers CA (2003) Species plantarum: flora of the world. Part 9. Chrysobalanaceae 1. Chrysobalanus to Parinari. Australian Biological Resources Study, Canberra

  • Prance GT, White F (1988) The genera of Chrysobalanaceae: a study in practical and theoretical taxonomy and its relevance to evolutionary biology. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 320:1–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raine NE, Willmer P, Stone GN (2002) Spatial structuring and floral avoidance behavior prevent ant–pollinator conflict in a Mexican ant–acacia. Ecology 83:3086–3096

    Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org

  • Rico-Gray V, Oliveira PS (2007) The ecology and evolution of ant–plant interactions. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-González MX, Malé PJG, Leroy C, Dejean A, Gryta H, Jargeat P, Quilichini A, Orivel J (2011) Specific, non-nutritional association between an ascomycete fungus and Allomerus plant–ants. Biol Lett 7:475–479

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Solano PJ, Durou S, Corbara B, Quilichini A, Cerdan P, Belin Depoux M, Delabie JHC, Dejean A (2003) Myrmecophytes of the understory of French Guianian rainforests: their distribution and their associated ants. Sociobiology 41:605–614

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley MC, Nathan HW, Phillips LK, Knight SJ, Galbraith JA, Winks CJ, Ward DF (2013) Invasive interactions: can Argentine ants indirectly increase the reproductive output of a weed? Arthropod Plant Interact 7:59–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanton ML, Palmer TM, Young TP, Evans A, Turner ML (1999) Sterilization and canopy modification of a swollen thorn acacia tree by a plant–ant. Nature 401:578–581

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuji K, Hasyim A, Harlion, Nakamura K (2004) Asian weaver ants, Oecophylla smaragdina, and their repelling of pollinators. Ecol Res 19:669–673

  • Wagner D (2000) Pollen viability reduction as a potential cost of ant association for Acacia constricta (Fabaceae). Am J Bot 87:711–715

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Willmer PG, Stone GN (1997) How aggressive ant-guards assist seed-set in Acacia flowers. Nature 388:165–167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yu DW, Pierce NE (1998) A castration parasite of an ant–plant mutualism. Proc R Soc Lond 265:375–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Laboratoire Environnement de Petit Saut for its logistical assistance, to Andrea Dejean for proofreading the manuscript, to Stéphanie Montembault, Isabelle Henry and Mathieu Duvignau for technical assistance, to Marc Gibernau for advice on statistical analyses, to Jean-Philippe Champenois for identifying the stingless bees and to Jérôme Barbut for identifying the Geometridae. Financial support was provided by the Fondation pour la Recherche sur la Biodiversité (research Agreement No. AAP-IN-2009-050), by the Programme Convergence 2007–2013 Région Guyane from the European Community (BI-Appli, ref. 115/SGAR-DE/2011/052274). This study has also benefited from ‘‘Investissement d’Avenir’’ grants managed by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (CEBA, ref. ANR-10-LABX-25-01 and TULIP, ref. ANR-10-LABX-0041).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Pierre-Jean G. Malé

    Present address: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G5, Canada

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS, EDB (Laboratoire Evolution et Diversité Biologique), Université de Toulouse, 118 route de Narbonne, 31062, Toulouse Cedex, France

    Pierre-Jean G. Malé

  2. Université de Toulouse, EDB, 118 route de Narbonne, 31062, Toulouse Cedex, France

    Pierre-Jean G. Malé & Angélique Quilichini

  3. CNRS, UMR Ecologie des Forêts de Guyane, Campus Agronomique, BP 316, 97379, Kourou Cedex, France

    Céline Leroy, Lucie Lusignan, Frédéric Petitclerc, Angélique Quilichini & Jérôme Orivel

  4. IRD, UMR AMAP (botAnique et bioinforMatique de l’Architecture des Plantes), Boulevard de la Lironde, TA A-51/PS2, 34398, Montpellier Cedex 5, France

    Céline Leroy

Authors
  1. Pierre-Jean G. Malé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Céline Leroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lucie Lusignan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Frédéric Petitclerc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Angélique Quilichini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jérôme Orivel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jérôme Orivel.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Heikki Hokkanen.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

11829_2014_9352_MOESM1_ESM.jpg

Figure S1. Photographs of the reproductive parts of Hirtella physophora during the different stages of anthesis and fruiting. (A) Flower buds are segregated on fasciculate racemous inflorescences; (B) as the flower opens, the stamens and the style progressively uncoil; (C) flowers are characterized by a pentamerous perianth with five pale pink to white petals alternating with the sepal. Allomerus decemarticulatus workers can be observed foraging at the mouth of the floral cup; (D) once the flowers are completely open, the stigma from one flower is several centimetres away from that flower’s anthers, but can be very close to the anthers of another flower; (E-F) the fruit is a fleshy drupe. (JPEG 4670 kb)

Movie S1. Footage of a Mecoceras sp. (Geometridae) visiting an Hirtella physophora inflorescence. Monitoring was performed using an infrared security camera coupled with a movement detector and a digital video recorder. The moth’s behaviour is consistent with its potential role as a pollinator. (WMV 1123 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Malé, PJ.G., Leroy, C., Lusignan, L. et al. The reproductive biology of the myrmecophyte, Hirtella physophora, and the limitation of negative interactions between pollinators and ants. Arthropod-Plant Interactions 9, 23–31 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-014-9352-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-014-9352-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation