Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Habitat edge effects alter ant-guard protection against herbivory

  • Research article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Edge effects are among the most important drivers of species interactions in fragmented habitats, but the impacts of edge effects on multitrophic interactions are largely unknown. In this study we assess edge effects on species interactions within an ant–plant mutualistic system—where ants protect plants against herbivory—to determine whether habitat edges alter the amount of protection ants provide. We focus on a single species of myrmecophytic plant, Solanum americanum, and experimentally manipulate ant access to study plants in large-scale fragmented habitat patches at the Savannah River Site National Environmental Research Park, USA. In this system, S. americanum commonly hosts honeydew-producing aphids that are tended by ants, and grasshoppers are the primary herbivores. We measured edge effects on the per-plant abundance of aphids and protective ants as well as the abundance of grasshoppers in each habitat patch, and we evaluated levels of ant protection against herbivory near and far from habitat edges. We found that ants provided significant protection to plants far from edges, where herbivory pressure was highest, despite the fact that aphids and ants were least abundant on these plants. Conversely, ants did not provide significant protection near edges, where herbivory pressure was lowest and aphids and ants were most abundant. We conclude that a strong edge effect on grasshopper abundance was a key factor determining the amount of protection ants provided against herbivory. Future studies of the impacts of habitat fragmentation on ant–plant mutualisms will benefit from studies of ant behavior in response to herbivory threats, and studies of edge effects on other species interactions may also need to consider how species’ behavioral patterns influence the interactions in question.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrawal AA (2011) Current trends in the evolutionary ecology of plant defence. Funct Ecol 25:420–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal AA, Rutter MT (1998) Dynamic anti-herbivore defense in ant-plants: the role of induced responses. Oikos 83:227–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bach CE, Kelly D (2004) Effects of forest edges on herbivory in a New Zealand mistletoe, Alepis flavida. N Z J Ecol 28:195–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Sarkar D (2010) lme4: Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using S4 Classes. R package version 0.999375-33. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html. Accessed 17 July 2013

  • Beattie AJ (1985) The evolutionary ecology of ant–plant mutualisms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beattie AJ, Hughes L (2002) Ant–plant interactions. In: Herrera CM, Pellmyr O (eds) Plant–animal interactions: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp 211–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Braschler B, Lampel G, Baur B (2003) Experimental small-scale grassland fragmentation alters aphid population dynamics. Oikos 100:581–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretz F, Hothorn T, Westfall P (2010) Multiple Comparisons Using R. CRC Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bronstein JL (1994) Conditional outcomes in mutualistic interactions. Trends Ecol Evol 9:214–217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bruna EM, Lapola DM, Vasconcelos HL (2004) Interspecific variation in the defensive responses of obligate plant–ants: experimental tests and consequences for herbivory. Oecologia 138:558–565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruna EM, Vasconcelos HL, Heredia S (2005) The effect of habitat fragmentation on communities of mutualists: amazonian ants and their host plants. Biol Conserv 124:209–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll CR, Janzen DH (1973) Ecology of foraging ants. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 4:231–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho KS, Vasconcelos HL (1999) Forest fragmentation in central amazonia and its effects on litter-dwelling ants. Biol Conserv 91:151–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casida JE, Quistad GB (eds) (1995) Pyrethrum flowers: production, chemistry, toxicology, and uses. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinge SK (2009) Ecology of fragmented landscapes. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawley MJ (2007) The R book. Wiley and Sons, Chichester

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman JH, Addicott JF (1991) Conditional interactions in ant–plant-herbivore mutualisms. In: Huxley CR, Cutler DF (eds) Ant–plant interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 92–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Debuse VJ, King J, House APN (2007) Effect of fragmentation, habitat loss and within-patch habitat characteristics on ant assemblages in semi-arid woodlands of eastern Australia. Landscape Ecol 22:731–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans DM, Turley NE, Levey DJ, Tewksbury JJ (2012) Habitat patch shape, not corridors, determines herbivory and fruit production of an annual plant. Ecology 93:1016–1025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WE, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (1999) How habitat edges change species interactions. American Naturalist 153:165–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiala B, Maschwitz U (1990) Studies on the South East-Asian ant–plant association crematogaster: Borneensis macaranga—adaptations of the ant partner. Insectes Soc 37:212–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frechette B, Bejan M, Lucas E, Giordanengo P, Vincent C (2010) Resistance of wild Solanum accessions to aphids and other potato pests in Quebec field conditions. J Insect Sci 10:16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma DJ, Agrawal AA (2009) Macroevolution and the biological diversity of plants and herbivores. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:18054–18061

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gibb H, Johansson T (2010) Forest succession and harvesting of hemipteran honeydew by boreal ants. Ann Zool Fenn 47:99–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Horvitz CC, Schemske DW (1984) Effects of ants and an ant-tended herbivore on seed production of a Neotropical herb. Ecology 65:1369–1378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hothorn TF, Bretz P, Westfall RM, Heiberger, Schutzenmeister A (2010) multcomp: Simultaneous Inference for General Linear Hypotheses. R package version 1.1-7. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/multcomp/index.html. Accessed 17 July 2013

  • Hubner G (2000) Differential interactions between an aphid endohyperparasitoid and three honeydew-collecting ant species: a field study of Alloxysta brevis (Thomson) (Hymenoptera:Alloxystidae). J Insect Behav 13:771–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janzen DH (1966) Coevolution of mutualism between ants and acacias in Central America. Evolution 20:249–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janzen DH (1967) Interaction of the bull’s-horn acacia (Acacia cornigera L.) with an ant inhabitant (Pseudomyrmex ferruginea F. Smith) in eastern Mexico. Univ Kans Sci Bull 47:315–558

    Google Scholar 

  • Janzen DH (1969) Allelopathy by myrmecophytes: ant azteca as an allelopathic agent of Cecropia. Ecology 50:147–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JB, Omland KS (2004) Model selection in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 19:101–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan I, Eubanks MD (2005) Aphids alter the community-wide impact of fire ants. Ecology 86:1640–1649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapola DM, Bruna EM, Vasconcelos HL (2003) Contrasting responses to induction cues by ants inhabiting Maieta guianensis (Melastomataceae). Biotropica 35:295–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurance WF, Camargo JLC, Luizao RCC, Laurance SG, Pimm SL, Bruna EM, Stouffer PC, Williamson GB, Benitez-Malvido J, Vasconcelos HL, Van Houtan KS, Zartman CE, Boyle SA, Didham RK, Andrade A, Lovejoy TE (2011) The fate of Amazonian forest fragments: a 32-year investigation. Biol Conserv 144:56–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez-Barrera F, Manson RH, Gonzalez-Espinosa M, Newton AC (2006) Effects of the type of montane forest edge on oak seedling establishment along forest-edge-exterior gradients. For Ecol Manag 225:234–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinson H (2009) Interactions lost and gained: a review of how trophic interactions are impacted by the fragmentation of habitats. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park

  • Massad TJ, Fincher RM, Smilanich AM, Dyer L (2011) A quantitative evaluation of major plant defense hypotheses, nature versus nurture, and chemistry versus ants. Arthropod Plant Interact 5:125–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiners SJ, Handel SN, Pickett STA (2000) Tree seedling establishment under insect herbivory: edge effects and interannual variation. Plant Ecol 151:161–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messina FJ (1981) Plant protection as a consequence of an ant-membracid mutualism: interactions on goldenrod (Solidago sp.). Ecology 62:1433–1440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ness JH, Bronstein IL (2004) The effects of invasive ants on prospective ant mutualists. Biol Invasions 6:445–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira PS, Del-Claro K (2005) Multitrophic interactions in a Neotropical savannah: ant-hemipteran systems, associated insect herbivores, and a host plant. In: Burslem DFRP, Pinard MA, Hartley SE (eds) Biotic interactions in the tropics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira PS, Freitas AVL (2004) Ant-plant-herbivore interactions in the neotropical cerrado savanna. Naturwissenschaften 91:557–570

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Orrock JL, Curler GR, Danielson BJ, Coyle DR (2011) Large-scale experimental landscapes reveal distinctive effects of patch geometry and connectivity on arthropod communities. Landscape Ecol 26:1361–1372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pompon J, Li XQ, Pelletier Y (2011) Resistance level to an aphid potato pest varies between genotypes from the same solanum accession. J Econ Entomol 104:1075–1079

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ries L, Fletcher RJ, Battin J, Sisk TD (2004) Ecological responses to habitat edges: mechanisms, models, and variability explained. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 35:491–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schupp EW, Feener DH (1991) Ant-defended plants in a Panamanian forest. In: Huxley CR, Cutler DF (eds) Ant–plant interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Semtner PJ, Tilson WM, Dara SK (1998) Performance of the tobacco aphid (Homoptera:Aphididae) on various host plants. J Entomol Sci 33:180–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Shibao H, Morimoto M, Okumura Y, Shimada M (2009) Fitness costs and benefits of ant attendance and soldier production for the social aphid Pseudoregma bambucicola (Homoptera:Aphididae:Hormaphidinae). Sociobiology 54:673–698

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadler B, Dixon AFG (2005) Ecology and evolution of aphid–ant interactions. Annual Review Of Ecology Evolution And Systematics, pp 345–372

  • Stechmann DH, Volkl W, Stary P (1996) Ant-attendance as a critical factor in the biological control of the banana aphid Pentalonia nigronervosa Coq (Homptera:Aphididae) in Oceania. J Appl Entomol Zeitschrift Fur Angewandte Entomologie 120:119–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Styrsky JD, Eubanks MD (2010) A facultative mutualism between aphids and an invasive ant increases plant reproduction. Ecol Entomol 35:190–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Brandl R (2004) Plant–insect interactions in fragmented landscapes. Annu Rev Entomol 49:405–430

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kruess A, Thies C (2002) Characteristics of insect populations on habitat fragments: a mini review. Ecol Res 17:229–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valladares G, Salvo A, Cagnolo L (2006) Habitat fragmentation effects on trophic processes of insect–plant food webs. Conserv Biol 20:212–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vasconcelos HL (1991) Mutualism between Maieta guianensis Aubl, a myrmecophytic melastome, and one of its ant inhabitants: ant protection against insect herbivores. Oecologia 87:295–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warriner RA, Gold RE, Austin JW (2008) Ecology of Dorymyrmex flavus (Hymenoptera:Formicidae) in Central Texas, including aspects of competition with Solenopsis invicta Buren. Sociobiology 52:229–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Way MJ (1963) Mutualism between ants and honeydew-producing homoptera. Ann Rev Entomol 8:307–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westfall PH (1997) Multiple testing of general contrasts using logical constraints and correlations. J Am Stat Assoc 92:299–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westfall PH, Troendle JF (2008) Multiple testing with minimal assumptions. Biometrical J 50:745–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimp GM, Murphy SM, Lewis D, Ries L (2011) Do edge responses cascade up or down a multi-trophic food web? Ecol Lett 14:863–870

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the USDA Forest Service-Savannah River for creating and maintaining our experimental landscapes; N. Haddad, D. Levey and L. Brudvig for their roles in designing and implementing the landscape experiment; E. Damschen, N. Haddad, D. Levey, and J. Orrock for their roles in maintaining the landscape experiment; the Corridor Project team for fruitful discussions that led to many ideas in this paper; L. Fenner, R. Malinen, and E. Smith for field assistance; J. Hille Ris Lambers and J. Lawler for reviewing the manuscript; and two anonymous reviewers for suggestions that also improved the manuscript. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation (DEB-0613701), by the University of Washington, and by funds provided to the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Savannah River, under Interagency Agreement DE-AI09-00SR22188 with the Department of Energy, Aiken, SC.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Washington, 24 Kincaid Hall, Box 351800, Seattle, WA, 98195-1800, USA

    Daniel M. Evans & Joshua J. Tewksbury

  2. Department of Biology, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road North, Mississauga, ON, L5L 1C6, Canada

    Nash E. Turley

Authors
  1. Daniel M. Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nash E. Turley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joshua J. Tewksbury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel M. Evans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Evans, D.M., Turley, N.E. & Tewksbury, J.J. Habitat edge effects alter ant-guard protection against herbivory. Landscape Ecol 28, 1743–1754 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9917-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9917-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation