| Literature DB >> 35855899 |
Mariana Cuautle1, Cecilia Díaz-Castelazo2, Citlalli Castillo-Guevara3, Carolina Guadalupe Torres Lagunes1.
Abstract
Land-use change in terrestrial environments is one of the main threats to biodiversity. The study of ant-plant networks has increased our knowledge of the diversity of interactions and structure of these communities; however, little is known about how land-use change affects ant-plant networks. Here we determine whether the change in land use, from native oak forest to induced grassland, affected the network properties of ant-plant networks in a temperate forest in Mexico. We hypothesize that the disturbed vegetation will be more nested and generalized due to the addition of generalist species to the network. The oak forest network comprises 47 plant species and 11 ant species, while the induced grassland network has 35 and 13, respectively. Floral nectar was the resource used most intensely by the ants in both vegetation types. The ant-plant network of the induced grassland was significantly more nested and generalist than that of the oak forest; however, none of the networks were nested when considering the frequency of interaction. In both vegetation types, the ants were more specialized than the plants, and niche overlap was low. This could be related to the dominant species present in each type of vegetation: Prenolepis imparis in the oak forest and Camponotus rubrithorax in the grassland. The central core of cold climate ant species in the oak forest was replaced by a central core of subordinate Camponotini and tropical specialists in the induced grassland. These results suggest that the increase in nestedness and generalization in the grassland may be related to the loss of the cold climate specialists from the core of the oak forest network. Our findings provide evidence that land-use change increases the level of generalization in the ant-plant interaction networks of temperate forests. ©2022 Cuautle et al.Entities:
Keywords: Ant-plant interactions; Land-use change; Mexico; Nested network
Year: 2022 PMID: 35855899 PMCID: PMC9288171 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.13679
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 3.061
Figure 1Study site, Flor del Bosque State Park.
Left: oak forest, Right: induced grassland. Photo taken by M. Cuautle.
Figure 2Map of the study zone.
Flor del Bosque State Park (FBSP), situated in Puebla State, in Mexico.
Characteristic of the study zone, obtained from Costes Quijano et al. (2006).
| Characteristic | Condition |
|---|---|
| Climate | Temperate-subhumid |
| Temperature | 14 to 16 °C |
| Precipitation | 750 to 950 mm |
| Rainy season | In the summer |
| Dry season | From November to April |
| Soil type | Lithosol and cambisol |
Plant species of the ant-plant interaction networks in Flor del Bosque State Park (FBST).
Oak forest (Fig. 3A) and Induced grassland (Fig. 3B). The resources or parts of the plants used by the ants are indicated: bud (bud); efn (extrafloral nectar); flo (flowers or cones); fru (fruits); hem (hemipteran honeydew); lea (leaf); by an X. Vegetation types are shown with an X.
| Plants FBSP | Vegetation | Plant resources/parts visited by the ants | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family | Genus/Species/Morpho | Codes | Oak forest | Induced Grassland | bud | efn | flo | fru | hem | lea |
| Agavaceae | AGPO | X | X | X | X | |||||
| AGSA | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| AGA1 | X | X | ||||||||
| AGA2 | X | X | X | |||||||
| AGA3 | X | X | ||||||||
| AGA4 | X | X | X | |||||||
| AGA5 | X | X | ||||||||
| AGA6 | X | X | ||||||||
| Amaryllidaceae | SPFO | X | X | |||||||
| Anacardiaceae | RHST | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Apocynaceae | APOC | X | X | X | ||||||
| MEAN | X | X | X | |||||||
| Asteraceae | BASL | X | X | X X | X | X | X | |||
| EUDE | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| GNAP | X | X | ||||||||
| PEME | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| SECI | X | X | X | |||||||
| SEMU | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| SENE | X | X | ||||||||
| STSE | X | X | X | |||||||
| VEVI | X | X | ||||||||
| X | X | X | ||||||||
| Asteraceae 1 Bercht. & J.Presl, | AST1 | X | ||||||||
| Asteraceae 2 | AST2 | X | ||||||||
| Bromeliaceae | BROM | X | X | |||||||
| Cactaceae | OPSPP | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Commelinaceae | COM1 | X | X | |||||||
| Convolvulaceae | IPO1 | X | X | |||||||
| IPO2 | X | X | X | X | ||||||
|
| IPHE | X | X | X | ||||||
| IPST | X | |||||||||
| Cyperaceae | CYPE | X | X | X | ||||||
| Ericaceae | ARPU | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Fabaceae | CAGR | X | X | X | X | |||||
| COOB | X | X | ||||||||
| MIAC | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| BRIN | X | X | ||||||||
| EYPO | X | X | X | |||||||
| EYSE | X | X | X | |||||||
| Fabaceae Lindl., 1836 4 | FAB4 | X | X | |||||||
| Fabaceae 5 | FAB5 | X | X | |||||||
| Fagaceae | QUME | X | X | |||||||
| Cupressaceae | JUNI | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Lamiaceae | SAPO | X | X | X | ||||||
| Lilaceae | LILA | X | X | |||||||
| Loranthaceae |
| LORA | X | X | ||||||
| Myrtaceae | EUCA | X | X | |||||||
| Orobanchaceae | CAST | X | X | |||||||
| Orobanchaceae | COAL | X | X | |||||||
| Passifloraceae | PAEX | X | X | X | ||||||
| Pinaceae | PINU | X | X | |||||||
| Poaceae | TRDA | X | X | X | X | |||||
| POAC | X | X | ||||||||
| Polygalaceae | MOCI | X | X | |||||||
| Polygalaceae | MOSC | X | X | |||||||
| Rhamnaceae | CECO | X | X | X | ||||||
| Rosaceae | AMDE | X | X | X | ||||||
| Rubiaceae | BOTE | X | X | |||||||
| Solanaceae | SONI | X | X | X | ||||||
| Sapindaceae | DOVI | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 4 | MOR4 | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 5 | MOR5 | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 6 | MOR6 | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 7 | MOR7 | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 8 | MOR8 | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 10 | MO10 | X | X | |||||||
| Morfo 11 | MO11 | X | X | |||||||
Ant species of the ant-plant interaction networks in Flor del Bosque State Park (FBST).
Oak forest (Fig. 3A) and induced grassland (Fig. 3B). Functional group (FG) is indicated for each ant species: CCS (Cold Climate specialists); GM (Generalized Myrmicinae); O (Opportunists); SC (Subordinate Camponitini); TCS (Tropical Climate Specialists). Ant codes used in the figures are indicated, an X indicate different types of vegetations.
| Ants FBSP | Vegetation | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subfamily | Genera/species | Codes | FG | Oak forest | Induced grassland |
| Dolichoderinae | DOIN | O | X | X | |
| Formicinae | LIDI | CCS | X | X | |
| CARU | SC | X | |||
| NYAU | O | X | |||
| PRIM | CCS | X | X | ||
| Myrmicinae | CREM | GM | X | X | |
| MOEB | GM | X | X | ||
| PHHI | GM | X | X | ||
| PHNU | GM | X | X | ||
| PHTE | GM | X | X | ||
| TETR | CCS | X | |||
| TEMN | CCS | X | |||
| Pseudomyrmecinae | PSPA | TCS | X | X | |
| PSEU | TCS | X | X | ||
Figure 3Ant-plant interaction networks in the oak forest (A) and the induced grassland (B).
Each box represents a species of plant or ant (plants orange, ants green), and the lines represent the frequency of the ant-plant interactions. The species name codes correspond to those presented in Tables 1 and 2.
Species level metrics (degree, species strength, interaction push-pull and d) for the ants and plants of the Oak forest and Induced grassland.
The highest values are shown in bold, and the lowest values for each metric are shown in italics.
| Oak forest | Induced grassland | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ant species code | Degree | Species strength | Interaction push-pull | d | Ant species code | Degree | Species strength | Interaction push-pull | d |
| PRIM | 39 | 33.29 | 0.83 | 0.15 | CARU | 31 | 23.97 | 0.74 | 0.08 |
| TETR | 14 | 4.56 | 0.25 | 0.20 | PSEU | 19 | 5.28 | 0.23 | 0.10 |
| LIDI | 15 | 3.98 | 0.20 | 0.40 | DOIN | 7 | 0.30 | −0.10 |
|
| DOIN | 4 | 1.68 | 0.17 | 0.68 | MOEB | 9 | 2.81 | 0.20 | 0.23 |
| PHHI | 4 | 2.19 | 0.30 | 0.72 | PSPA | 6 | 0.53 | −0.08 | 0.11 |
| MOEB |
| 0.24 | −0.76 | 0.67 | PHTE | 3 | 0.04 | −0.32 | 0.05 |
| PSPA |
|
|
| 0.06 | PHNU | 2 | 0.02 | −0.49 | 0.05 |
| PSEU | 2 | 0.02 | −0.49 | 0.01 | CREMA | 2 | 0.09 | −0.46 | 0.38 |
| PHTE |
|
|
| 0.15 | LIDI | 2 | 0.53 | −0.24 | 0.43 |
| PHNU |
|
|
|
| NYAU | 3 | 0.91 | −0.03 | 0.66 |
| CREMA |
| 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | PHHI | 2 |
| −0.49 |
|
| PRIM |
| 0.50 | −0.50 | 0.88 | |||||
| TEMN |
|
|
| 0.27 | |||||