Advertisement

Reinforced Specificity of Pollinator Moths

  • Atsushi KawakitaEmail author
  • Makoto Kato
Chapter
Part of the Ecological Research Monographs book series (ECOLOGICAL)

Abstract

The remarkably high level of partner specificity is a hallmark feature of the leafflower–leafflower moth mutualism. Together with the fig–fig wasp and yucca–yucca moth systems, obligate pollination mutualisms provide some of the best examples of highly species-specific plant–insect associations. However, the evolutionary processes underlying these patterns are poorly understood. The high degree of specificity in pollinating seed parasites is often regarded as the fortuitous result of specialization in their ancestors because these insects are derived from endophytic herbivores that are themselves highly host-specific. This chapter focuses on the comparison of the level of host specificity in Epicephala to those of purely parasitic gracillariid relatives as a test of whether mutualism reinforces partner specificity. When interpreted with what is known in the fig and yucca systems, such an analysis serves as a useful approach to determine how partner specificity is shaped in coevolved mutualisms.

Keywords

Caloptilia Cuphodes Diphtheroptila Epicephala Glochidion Gracillariidae Host specificity Phylogeny 

Literature Cited

  1. Aanen DK, Eggleton P, Lefèvre CR, Frøslev TG, Rosendahl S, Boomsma JJ (2002) The evolution of fungus-growing termites and their mutualistic fungal symbionts. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:14887–14892CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Brouat C, Garcia N, Andary C, McKey D (2001) Plant lock and key: pairwise coevolution of an exclusion filter in an ant–plant mutualism. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:2131–2141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coyne JA, Orr HA (2004) Speciation. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  4. Currie CR, Wong B, Stuart AE, Schultz TR, Rehner SA, Mueller UG, Sung GH, Spatafora JW, Straus NA (2003) Ancient tripartite coevolution in the attine ant–microbe symbiosis. Science 299:386–388CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Davidson DW, McKey D (1993) The evolutionary ecology of symbiotic ant–plant relationships. J Hymenopt Res 2:13–83Google Scholar
  6. Edwards DP, Hassall M, Sutherland WJ, Yu DW (2006) Assembling a mutualism: Ant symbionts locate their host plants by detecting volatile compounds. Insect Soc 53:172–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ehrlich PR, Raven PH (1964) Butterflies and plants: a study in coevolution. Evolution 18:586–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farrell BD (1998) ‘Inordinate fondness’ explained: why are there so many beetles? Science 281:555–559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Federle W, Maschwitz U, Fiala B, Riederer M, Hölldobler B (1997) Slippery ant-plants and skillful climbers: selection and protection of specific ant partners by epicuticular wax blooms in Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae). Oecologia 112:217–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Gómez JM, Zamora R (2006) Ecological factors that promote the evolution of generalization in pollination systems. In: Waser N, Ollerton J (eds) Plant–pollinator interactions: from generalization to specialization. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 145–166Google Scholar
  11. Grangier J, Dejean A, Malé PJG, Solano PJ, Orivel J (2009) Mechanisms driving the specificity of a myrmecophyte–ant association. Biol J Linn Soc 97:90–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guimarães PR, Rico-Gray V, Oliveira PS, Izzo TJ, dos Reis SF, Thompson JN (2007) Interaction intimacy affects structure and coevolutionary dynamics in mutualistic networks. Curr Biol 17:1797–1803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Heil M, McKey D (2003) Protective ant–plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:425–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heil M, Rattke J, Boland W (2005) Postsecretory hydrolysis of nectar sucrose and specialization in ant/plant mutualism. Science 308:560–563CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Herre EA, Jandér KC, Machado CA (2008) Evolutionary ecology of figs and their associates: recent progress and outstanding puzzles. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:439–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hosokawa T, Kikuchi Y, Nikoh N, Shimada M, Fukatsu T (2006) Strict host–symbiont cospeciation and reductive genome evolution in insect gut bacteria. PLoS Biol 4:1841–1851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jousselin E, van Noort S, Rasplus JY, Greeff JM (2006) Patterns of diversification of Afrotropical Otiteselline fig wasps: phylogenetic study reveals a double radiation across host figs and conservatism of host association. J Evol Biol 19:253–266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Jousselin E, van Noort S, Berry V, Rasplus JY, Rønsted N, Erasmus JC, Greeff JM (2008) One fig to bind them all: host conservatism in a fig wasp community unravelled by cospeciation analyses among pollinating and nonpollinating fig wasps. Evolution 62:1777–1797CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kawakita A, Kato M (2009) Repeated independent evolution of obligate pollination mutualism in the Phyllantheae–Epicephala association. Proc R Soc B 276:417–426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lavin M, Herendeen PS, Wojciechowski MF (2005) Evolutionary rates analysis of Leguminosae implicates a rapid diversification of lineages during the Tertiary. Syst Biol 54:575–594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lopez-Vaamonde C, Rasplus JY, Weiblen GD, Cook JM (2001) Molecular phylogenies of fig wasps: partial cocladogenesis of pollinators and parasites. Mol Phylogenet Evol 21:55–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Machado CA, Robbins N, Gilbert MTP, Herre EA (2005) Critical review of host specificity and its coevolutionary implications in the fig/fig-wasp mutualism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:6558–6565CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Marussich WA, Machado CA (2007) Host-specificity and coevolution among pollinating and nonpollinating New World fig wasps. Mol Ecol 16:1925–1946CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mikheyev AS, Mueller UG, Abbot P (2006) Cryptic sex and many-to-one coevolution in the fungus-growing ant symbiosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:10702–10706CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Mitter C, Farrell B, Wiegmann B (1988) The phylogenetic study of adaptive zones: has phytophagy promoted insect diversification? Am Nat 132:107–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Molbo D, Machado CA, Sevenster JG, Keller L, Herre EA (2003) Cryptic species of fig-pollinating wasps: implications for the evolution of the fig–wasp mutualism, sex allocation, and precision of adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:5867–5872CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Moran NA, Telang A (1998) The evolution of bacteriocyte-associated endosymbionts in insects. Bioscience 48:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mueller UG, Rehner SA, Schultz TR (1998) The evolution of agriculture in ants. Science 281:2034–2038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pellmyr O (1999) A systematic revision of the yucca moths in the Tegeticula yuccasella complex north of Mexico. Syst Entomol 24:243–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pellmyr O (2002) Pollination by animals. In: Herrera CM, Pellmyr O (eds) Plant–animal interactions. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 157–184Google Scholar
  31. Pellmyr O (2003) Yuccas, yucca moths, and coevolution: a review. Ann Mo Bot Gard 90:35–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pellmyr O, Thompson JN (1992) Multiple occurrences of mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 89:2927–2929CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Pellmyr O, Thompson JN, Brown JM, Harrison RG (1996a) Evolution of pollination and mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. Am Nat 148:827–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pellmyr O, Leebens-Mack J, Huth CJ (1996b) Non-mutualistic yucca moths and their evolutionary consequences. Nature 380:155–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Pellmyr O, Balcázar-Lara M, Althoff DM, Segraves KA, Leebens-Mack J (2006) Phylogeny and life history evolution of Prodoxus yucca moths (Lepidoptera: Prodoxidae). Syst Entomol 31:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Poulsen M, Boomsma JJ (2005) Mutualistic fungi control crop diversity in fungus-growing ants. Science 307:741–744CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Price P (1980) Evolutionary biology of parasites. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  38. Quek SP, Davies SJ, Ashton PS, Itino T, Pierce NE (2007) The geography of diversification in mutualistic ants: a gene’s-eye view into the Neogene history of Sundaland rain forests. Mol Ecol 16:2045–2062CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Schluter D (2000) The ecology of adaptive radiation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith CI, Godsoe WKW, Tank S, Yoder JB, Pellmyr O (2008b) Distinguishing coevolution from covicariance in an obligate pollination mutualism: asynchronous divergence in Joshua tree and its pollinators. Evolution 62:2676–2687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Smith CI, Yoder JB, Godsoe W, Pellmyr O (2009) Host specificity and reproductive success of yucca moths (Tegeticula spp., Lepidoptera: Prodoxidae) mirror patterns of gene flow between host plant varieties of Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia: Agavaceae). Mol Ecol 18:5218–5229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Strauss SY, Zangerl AR (2002) Plant–insect interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. In: Herrera CM, Pellmyr O (eds) Plant–animal interactions. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 77–106Google Scholar
  43. Thompson JN (1994) The coevolutionary process. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thompson JN (2005) The geographic mosaic of coevolution. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  45. Visser AA, Ros VID, de Beer ZW, Debets AJM, Hartog E, Kuyper TW, Laessøe T, Slippers B, Aanen DK (2009) Levels of specificity of Xylaria species associated with fungus-growing termites: a phylogenetic approach. Mol Ecol 18:553–567CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang G, Cannon CH, Chen J (2016) Pollinator sharing and gene flow among closely related sympatric dioecious fig taxa. Proc R Soc B 283:20152963CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Weiblen GD (2002) How to be a fig wasp. Annu Rev Entomol 47:299–330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Weiblen GD, Bush GL (2002) Speciation in fig pollinators and parasites. Mol Ecol 11:1573–1578CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Ecological ResearchKyoto UniversityOtsuJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Human and Environmental StudiesKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations