Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Boundary lines in symbiosis forms

  • Published:
Symbiosis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Symbiosis can take different forms (parasitism, mutualism, commensalism, etc.) but boundaries between different types of symbiotic interactions are not well defined. The kinds of symbiotic associations between organisms cannot however be restricted to isolated and distinct categories. These associations are part of a broad continuum in which it is difficult to know where one type of association ends and another begins. Moreover, different scientists use the same term to mean different things or different terms to mean the same thing. This can obscure what is biologically important and what is not. This communication proposes a new classification scheme, which simply and comprehensively illustrates relationships between the various kinds of associations. The scheme illustrates relationships clearly and highlights the continuum between types of associations. It further indicates where modifications to the scheme are possible over time. The classification of the association between two organisms can be reduced to two factors: 1) the impact incurred by the host (benefit or damage) and 2) the relative duration of the association (RDA), i.e. the ratio of the duration of the association to the life expectancy of the symbiont. The conceptual figure provides concrete examples and illustrates some relationships that can change during different life stages. This figure should help teachers and students in the understanding of symbiosis, and could be a starting point for future discussions in the continuously developing research fields studying ecological and evolutionary implications of symbiotic relationships.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allaby M (1992) The concise Oxford dictionary of zoology. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhed F, Ley R, Sonnenburg J, Peterson D, Gordon J (2005) Host-bacterial mutualism in the human intestine. Science 307:1915–1920

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borowitzka M, Lavery P, van Keulen M (2006) Epiphytes of seagrasses. In: Larkum A, Orth P, Duarte C (eds) Seagrasses: biology. Ecology and Conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 458–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Boucher D, James S, Keeler K (1982) The ecology of mutualism. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 13:315–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bshary R, Grutter AS (2002) Asymmetric cheating opportunities and partner control in a cleaner fish mutualism. Anim Behav 63(3):547–555. doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush A, Fernandez J, Esch G, Seed J (2001) Parasitism. The diversity and ecology of animal parasites. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbone C, Teacher A, Rowcliffe M (2007) The costs of carnivory. PLoS Biol 5(2)

  • Cassier P, Brugerolle G, Combes C, Grain J, Raibaut A (1998) Le parasitisme: Un équilibre dynamique. Masson, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Chow J, Tang H, Mazmanian S (2011) Pathobionts of the gastrointestinal microbiota and inflammatory disease. Curr Opin Immunol 23:473–480

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Colleye O, Parmentier E (2012) Overview on the diversity of sounds produced by clownfishes (pomacentridae): importance of acoustic signals in their peculiar way of life. PLoS One 7(11):e49179. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049179

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Combes C (1995) Interactions durables - Ecologie et évolution du parasitisme. Masson, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor RC (1995) The benefits of mutualism: a conceptual framework. Biol Rev 70(3):427–457. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1995.tb01196.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bary A (1879) Die erscheinung der symbiose. Verlag von Karl J. Trubner, Strassburg

    Google Scholar 

  • de Meeûs T, Renaud F (2002) Parasites within the new phylogeny of eukaryotes. Trends Parasitol 18:247–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eeckhaut I, McHugh D, Mardulyn P, Tiedemann R, Monteyne D, Jangoux M, Milinkovitch M (2000) Myzostomida: a link between trochozoans and flatworms? Proc R Soc Lond Biol Sci 267:1383–1392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes J (1979) Parasite population and host community structure. In: Nickol B (ed) Host-parasite interfaces. Academic, London, pp 27–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Immelmann K (1990) Dictionnaire de l’éthologie: psychologie et sciences humaine. Pierre Mardaga, Bruxelles

    Google Scholar 

  • Jernakoff P, Brearley A, Nielsen J (1996) Factors affecting grazer-epiphytes interactions in temperate seagrass meadows. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 34:109–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinne O (1980) Diseases of marine animals, I., general aspects, protozoa to gastropoda. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepzig K, Adams A, Handelsman J, Raffa K (2009) Symbioses: a key driver of insect physiological processes, ecological interactions, evolutionary diversification, and impacts on humans. Environ Entomol 38(1):67–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koop JAH, Huber SK, Laverty SM, Clayton DH (2011) Experimental demonstration of the fitness consequences of an introduced parasite of Darwin’s finches. PLoS One 6(5):e19706. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019706

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lafferty KD, Kuris AM (2002) Trophic strategies, animal diversity and body size. Trends Ecol E 17(11):507–513. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02615-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lank DB, Rockwell RF, Cooke F (1990) Frequency-dependent fitness consequences of intraspecific nest parasitism in snow geese. Evolution 44(6):1436–1453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee J, Kim T, Choe J (2009) Commensalism or mutualism: conditional outcomes in a branchiobdellid–crayfish symbiosis. Oecologia 159(1):217–224. doi:10.1007/s00442-008-1195-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ley R, Peterson D, Gordon J (2006) Ecological and evolutionary forces shaping microbial diversity in the human intestine. Cell Tissue Res 124:837–848

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez-Sepulcre A, Kokko H (2002) The role of kin recognition in the evolution of conspecific brood parasitism. Anim Behav 64:215–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazmanian S, Round J, Kasper D (2008) A microbial symbiosis factor prevents intestinal inflammatory disease. Nature 453:620–625

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mieog JC, Olsen JL, Berkelmans R, Bleuler-Martinez SA, Willis BL, van Oppen MJH (2009) The roles and interactions of symbiont, host and environment in defining coral fitness. PLoS One 4(7):e6364. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen C (1996) Three new species of Loxosoma (Entoprocta) from Phuket, Thailand, with a review of the genus. Zool Scr 25(1):61–75. doi:10.1111/j.1463-6409.1996.tb00152.x

  • Nogata Y, Matsumura K (2006) Larval development and settlement of a whale barnacle. Biol Lett 2(1):92–93. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ollerton J, McCollin D, Fautin DG, Allen GR (2007) Finding NEMO: nestedness engendered by mutualistic organization in anemonefish and their hosts. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 274(1609):591–598. doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier E, Das K (2004) Commensal vs. Parasitic relationship between carapini fish and their hosts: some further insight through δ13C and δ15N measurements. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 310(1):47–58. doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2004.03.019

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier E, Vandewalle P (2004) Further insight on the Carapini - holothurian relationships. Mar Biol 146:455–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price P (1977) General concepts on the evolutionary biology of parasites. Evolution 31:405–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sapp JT (2004) The dynamics of symbiosis: an historical overview. Can J Bot 82:1046–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shields JD, Wood FEI (1993) Impact of parasites on the reproduction and fecundity of the blue sand crab Portunus pelagicus from Moreton Bay. Australia Mar Ecol Prog Ser 92:159–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas F, Guégan J, Michalakis Y, Renaud F (2000) Parasites and host life-history traits: implications for community ecology and species coexistence. Int J Parasitol 30:669–674

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vinson SB, Iwantsch GF (1980) Host regulation by insect parasitoids. Q Rev Biol 55(2):143–165

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • West S, Griffin A, Gardner A (2007) Social semantics: altruism, cooperation, mutualism, strong reciprocity and group selection. J Evol Biol 20:415–432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams EH, Mignucci-Giannoni AA, Bunkley-Williams L, Bonde RK, Self-Sullivan C, Preen A, Cockcroft VG (2003) Echeneid–sirenian associations, with information on sharksucker diet. J Fish Biol 63(5):1176–1183. doi:10.1046/j.1095-8649.2003.00236.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapalski MK (2011) Is absence of proof a proof of absence? comments on commensalism. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol 302(3–4):484–488. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2011.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant from Fonds de la Recherche Fondamentale Collective (no. 2.4.535.10.F) delivered by the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research. This is the AFFISH (Applied and Fish Research Center) publication n°3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Functional and Evolutionary Morphology, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium

    Eric Parmentier

  2. Laboratory of Oceanology, MARE Centre, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium

    Loïc Michel

  3. STARESO Research Station, Calvi, Corsica, France

    Loïc Michel

Authors
  1. Eric Parmentier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Loïc Michel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Parmentier.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Parmentier, E., Michel, L. Boundary lines in symbiosis forms. Symbiosis 60, 1–5 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13199-013-0236-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13199-013-0236-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation