| Literature DB >> 19707266 |
Richard Bailey1, Karsten Schönrogge, James M Cook, George Melika, György Csóka, Csaba Thuróczy, Graham N Stone.
Abstract
Oak galls are spectacular extended phenotypes of gallwasp genes in host oak tissues and have evolved complex morphologies that serve, in part, to exclude parasitoid natural enemies.Parasitoids and their insect herbivore hosts have coevolved to produce diverse communities comprising about a third of all animal species. The factors structuring these communities, however, remain poorly understood. An emerging theme in community ecology is the need to consider the effects of host traits, shaped by both natural selection and phylogenetic history, on associated communities of natural enemies. Here we examine the impact of host traits and phylogenetic relatedness on 48 ecologically closed and species-rich communities of parasitoids attacking gall-inducing wasps on oaks. Gallwasps induce the development of spectacular and structurally complex galls whose species- and generation-specific morphologies are the extended phenotypes of gallwasp genes. All the associated natural enemies attack their concealed hosts through gall tissues, and several structural gall traits have been shown to enhance defence against parasitoid attack. Here we explore the significance of these and other host traits in predicting variation in parasitoid community structure across gallwasp species. In particular, we test the "Enemy Hypothesis," which predicts that galls with similar morphology will exclude similar sets of parasitoids and therefore have similar parasitoid communities. Having controlled for phylogenetic patterning in host traits and communities, we found significant correlations between parasitoid community structure and several gall structural traits (toughness, hairiness, stickiness), supporting the Enemy Hypothesis. Parasitoid community structure was also consistently predicted by components of the hosts' spatiotemporal niche, particularly host oak taxonomy and gall location (e.g., leaf versus bud versus seed). The combined explanatory power of structural and spatiotemporal traits on community structure can be high, reaching 62% in one analysis. The observed patterns derive mainly from partial niche specialisation of highly generalist parasitoids with broad host ranges (>20 hosts), rather than strict separation of enemies with narrower host ranges, and so may contribute to maintenance of the richness of generalist parasitoids in gallwasp communities. Though evolutionary escape from parasitoids might most effectively be achieved via changes in host oak taxon, extreme conservatism in this trait for gallwasps suggests that selection is more likely to have acted on gall morphology and location. Any escape from parasitoids associated with evolutionary shifts in these traits has probably only been transient, however, due to subsequent recruitment of parasitoid species already attacking other host galls with similar trait combinations.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19707266 PMCID: PMC2719808 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000179
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Biol ISSN: 1544-9173 Impact factor: 8.029
Figure 1Resource availability and trait variation in oak cynipid galls.
(A) Gallwasp larvae. 1. A gallwasp larva (Andricus lucidus asexual generation) in its larval chamber. 2. Multiple larvae in the multilocular sexual generation gall of Biorhiza pallida. (B) One of the parasitoids in this study, M. stigmatizans (Torymidae) drilling through the wall of an oak cynipid gall. (C) Matrix showing some of the diversity in defensive gall morphologies [23] and gall locations represented by species in this study, with examples (sg, sexual generation; ag, asexual generation): 1. A. lucidus (ag). 2. A. hartigi (ag). 3. A. grossulariae (ag). 4. A. caputmedusae (ag). 5. A. lignicolus (ag). 6. A. gemmeus (ag). 7. A. lucidus (sg). 8. Cynips longiventris (ag). 9. Callirhytis glandium (ag). 10. Dryocosmus nitidus (sg). 11. Neuroterus lanuginosus. 12. A. quercustozae (ag). 13. A. grossulariae (sg). 14. A. quercuscalicis (ag). 15. A. coronatus (ag). Scale bar = 5 mm in all images.
Summary of host characters used as explanatory variables in analyses of parasitoid community composition.
| Variable | Category | Type | Character Variation |
| Gall hairiness | Morphology | Binary | Galls either have a smooth or hairy (defensive) surface. Labile. |
| Gall spininess | Morphology | Binary | Galls are either spineless or covered with spines (defensive). Labile. |
| Gall toughness | Morphology | Categorical | Four levels, increasing in toughness from 1 to 4. High toughness is defensive. Labile. |
| Gall stickiness | Morphology | Binary | Galls are either coated with sticky resin (defensive) or not. Labile. |
| Gall internal airspace | Morphology | Binary | Galls are either solid or have an internal airspace surrounding the larval chamber (defensive). Labile. |
| Host gall size | Morphology | Continuous | The volume of each mature gall type, with gall inducer larval chamber subtracted. |
| Host resource size | Resource availability | Continuous | The volume of each fully developed host gallwasp larva. |
| Gall locularity | Resource availability | Binary | Galls either contain a single host gallwasp larva, or >1. Labile. |
| Mean number of hosts/gall | Resource availability | Continuous | Mean number of parasitoids emerging from galls producing at least one parasitoid. |
| Organ galled | Spatiotemporal niche | Categorical | Gall location on the oak host, either shoot bud, dormant bud on the trunk (lenticel), acorn, leaf, catkin, or shoot. Labile. |
| Oak section | Spatiotemporal niche | Binary | Galls develop either on oaks in the section Cerris ( |
| Season of development | Spatiotemporal niche | Continuous | The week, starting at April 1st, that the gall was first observed to start development. |
| Persistence | Spatiotemporal niche | Continuous | The mean duration of gall development, in weeks. |
| Sample size | Sampling effort | Continuous | Total number of parasitoids emerging from galls of a given type. |
These are categorised as describing gall morphology, host resource availability, or gall spatiotemporal niche. Character states for all gall types are given in Table S2. Gall morphology character states were defined as defensive on the basis of their demonstrated efficacy in single species studies [27],[34]. Categorical characters with many state changes in our species set [21],[23]–[25],[41],[43] provide multiple independent contrasts and are labelled as labile.
Please see Material and Methods for justification of classifying oak hosts at the section rather than species level.
Figure 2Phylogenetic relationships between host gallwasps.
The mitochondrial DNA sequence phylogeny of host gallwasps, presented as a cladogram with node support shown by posterior probabilities in Bayesian analyses (see Materials and Methods). Coloured symbols at branch tips indicate gallwasp clade membership (following 23,25,39), allowing recognition of phylogenetic patterns in Figure 3. The shape of the symbol indicates the generation included in our analysis (circle, asexual; square, sexual).
Figure 3Cluster analyses showing similarity in parasitoid community composition and gall phenotypes.
Cluster analyses showing similarities between gall types in (A) parasitoid assemblage composition, and (B) spatiotemporal niche character states (see Materials and Methods). Colours of symbols at branch tips match those for the clades in Figure 2. Sexual generation galls are indicated by square symbols and red branches.
Phylogenetic patterns in host gall traits and parasitoid communities for sexual and asexual gallwasp generations.
| Gall trait | Asexual | Sexual |
|
| ||
|
| — | — |
|
|
| — |
|
|
| — |
|
|
| — |
|
|
| — |
|
|
| — |
|
| ||
|
| — |
|
|
| — | — |
|
| — | — |
|
| ||
|
|
| — |
|
|
| — |
|
| — |
|
|
| — | — |
Cell entries show the significance of matrix correlations (and their sign) between host phylogenetic relatedness and gall traits.
Significant matrix correlations between gall traits (rows) and Bray-Curtis similarity in parasitoid assemblage composition.
| Variable | Dataset | |
| Asexual | Sexual | |
|
| 1 | — |
|
| ***4 | * |
|
| 1 | — |
|
| ||
|
| *2 | — |
|
| — | — |
|
| *1 | N/A |
|
| ** | |
|
| — | N/A |
|
| *2 | 1 |
|
| ||
|
| 1 | — |
|
| — | 1 |
|
| *2 | *1 |
|
| ||
|
| ***2 | * |
|
| **3 | **1 |
|
| *1 | — |
|
| — | ***1 |
Asterisks indicate significance for the pooled sites dataset (*, p<0.05; **, p<0.01; ***, p<0.001), whereas numbers indicate the number out of five individual sites showing a significant correlation (all p<0.05). Results are presented for asexual and sexual generations tested separately. Results for relatedness are given when this variable alone is fitted, followed in the row below by significance in a multiple regression with all other significant variables in the MAM (see Material and Methods). Entries marked N/A lack variance in the host gall trait for that row.
Parameter estimates, significance, and percent deviance explained in MAMs for PRAs of parasitoid community composition (see Materials and Methods).
| Dataset | MDS Axis | Spatiotemporal Niche | Resource | Gall Morphology | Sample Size | Percent Deviance Explained | |||||
| Oak Section | Organ Galled | Persistence | Locularity | Hosts/Gall | Hairiness | Toughness | Gall Size | Total Emer | |||
|
| 1 | −0.71 | 18.9 | ||||||||
| 2 | −0.69 | 13.2 | |||||||||
| 3 | 0.21 | 0.81** | −1.14* | 0.26** | 62.1 | ||||||
|
| 1 | −0.91 | 41.9 | ||||||||
| 2 | −0.57 | 54.7 | |||||||||
| 3 | ns | ||||||||||
|
| 1 | −0.37* | 0.20** | 6.2 | |||||||
| 2 | −0.20 | 0.77 | −0.20 | 54.7 | |||||||
| 3 | 0.55 | 0.16 | 37.2 | ||||||||
|
| 1 | ns | |||||||||
| 2 | ns | ||||||||||
| 3 | −0.25 | 61.4 | |||||||||
|
| 1 | 0.34 | 0.96 | 0.13 | 26.7 | ||||||
| 2 | ns | ||||||||||
| 3 | ns | ||||||||||
|
| 1 | 0.57 | 38.3 | ||||||||
| 2 | ns | ||||||||||
| 3 | ns | ||||||||||
|
| 1 | −0.78 | −0.0003 | 60.6 | |||||||
| 2 | ns | ||||||||||
| 3 | −0.32 | −0.68 | 14.5 | ||||||||
|
| 1 | ns | |||||||||
| 2 | −0.83 | 53.5 | |||||||||
| 3 | −0.14 | 6.8 | |||||||||
Only significant results are shown, separated by site and for sexual and asexual host generations. Significance level is indicated as follows: no *, p<0.05; *, p<0.003 (threshold for significance with Bonferroni correction for analyses for individual sites and generations); and **, p<0.001. Total emer, total number of emerging parasitoids; Hosts/gall, mean parasitoids per gall, given by total emergence/total producing from Table S2. The figures following the name of each dataset in the first column give the number of species/number of phylogenetically independent contrasts in each analysis. No significant correlations for any dataset were obtained for the following host gall variables: resource volume, spininess, stickiness, and the presence/absence of an internal airspace. No significant correlations for any variable were obtained for sexual generation galls at Szentkút, either sexual or asexual generation galls at Várpalota (insufficient degrees of freedom were available for analysis in the sexual generation), or sexual generation galls at Sopron. These analyses have four of the five lowest numbers of species and independent contrasts, with 8/5, 4/1, 13/5, and 12/6, respectively. Superscript letters show significant character states for “organ galled” locations (a–c) and gall “toughness” (d and e).
Leaf.
Soft.
Very hard.
Acorn.
Shoot.
Figure 4Host trait-associated variation in parasitism by generalist parasitoids in communities associated with sexual and asexual generation oak gallwasp communities.
The dominance plot shows, for the five most generalist parasitoid species, the proportion individuals of a given species comprise of all emerged parasitoids ( = dominance) averaged across host gall types with specific gall locations and oak associations. Gall locations refer to the plant organ galled (the location category “wood” refers to galls integral to the main axis of shoots), while oak taxon associations refer to gall induction on species in either Quercus section Cerris or section Quercus sensu stricto. The selected parasitoid taxa are A. gallarum (Eulophidae), C. fungosa (Pteromalidae), E. brunniventris (Eurytomidae), M. dorsalis (Torymidae), and S. biguttata (Eurytomidae). The data from different host gall types have been pooled at two biologically relevant spatial scales, namely galls on different plant organs (left) and on different oak host taxa (right).