Mutualisms are interspecific interactions in which both players benefit. Explaining their maintenance is problematic, because cheaters should outcompete cooperative conspecifics, leading to mutualism instability. Monoecious figs (Ficus) are pollinated by host-specific wasps (Agaonidae), whose larvae gall ovules in their “fruits” (syconia). Female pollinating wasps oviposit directly into Ficus ovules from inside the receptive syconium. Across Ficus species, there is a widely documented segregation of pollinator galls in inner ovules and seeds in outer ovules. This pattern suggests that wasps avoid, or are prevented from ovipositing into, outer ovules, and this results in mutualism stability. However, the mechanisms preventing wasps from exploiting outer ovules remain unknown. We report that in Ficus rubiginosa, offspring in outer ovules are vulnerable to attack by parasitic wasps that oviposit from outside the syconium. Parasitism risk decreases towards the centre of the syconium, where inner ovules provide enemy-free space for pollinator offspring. We suggest that the resulting gradient in offspring viability is likely to contribute to selection on pollinators to avoid outer ovules, and by forcing wasps to focus on a subset of ovules, reduces their galling rates. This previously unidentified mechanism may therefore contribute to mutualism persistence independent of additional factors that invoke plant defences against pollinator oviposition, or physiological constraints on pollinators that prevent oviposition in all available ovules.

Fig trees are pollinated by fig wasps, which also oviposit in female flowers. The wasp larvae gall and eat developing seeds. Although fig trees benefit from allowing wasps to oviposit, because the wasp offspring disperse pollen, figs must prevent wasps from ovipositing in all flowers, or seed production would cease, and the mutualism would go extinct. In Ficus racemosa, we find that syconia (‘figs’) that have few foundresses (ovipositing wasps) are underexploited in the summer (few seeds, few galls, many empty ovules) and are overexploited in the winter (few seeds, many galls, few empty ovules). Conversely, syconia with many foundresses produce intermediate numbers of galls and seeds, regardless of season. We use experiments to explain these patterns, and thus, to explain how this mutualism is maintained. In the hot summer, wasps suffer short lifespans and therefore fail to oviposit in many flowers. In contrast, cooler temperatures in the winter permit longer wasp lifespans, which in turn allows most flowers to be exploited by the wasps. However, even in winter, only in syconia that happen to have few foundresses are most flowers turned into galls. In syconia with higher numbers of foundresses, interference competition reduces foundress lifespans, which reduces the proportion of flowers that are galled. We further show that syconia encourage the entry of multiple foundresses by delaying ostiole closure. Taken together, these factors allow fig trees to reduce galling in the wasp-benign winter and boost galling (and pollination) in the wasp-stressing summer. Interference competition has been shown to reduce virulence in pathogenic bacteria. Our results show that interference also maintains cooperation in a classic, cooperative symbiosis, thus linking theories of virulence and mutualism. More generally, our results reveal how frequency-dependent population regulation can occur in the fig-wasp mutualism, and how a host species can ‘set the rules of the game’ to ensure mutualistic behavior in its symbionts.

Summary Fig trees (Ficus ) are pollinated only by agaonid wasps, whose larvae also gall fig ovules. Each ovule develops into either a seed (when pollinated) or a wasp (when an egg is also laid inside) but not both. 2. Ovipositing wasps (foundresses) favour ovules near the centre of the enclosed inflorescence (syconium or ' fig'), leaving ovules near the outer wall to develop into seeds. This spatial stratification of wasps and seeds ensures reproduction in both partners, and thereby enables mutualism persistence. However, the mechanism(s) responsible remain(s) unknown. 3. Theory shows that foundresses will search for increasingly rare inner ovules and ignore outer ovules, as long as ovipositing in outer ovules is sufficiently slow and/or if inner ovules confer greater fitness to wasps. The fig-pollinator mutualism can therefore be stabilized by strong time constraints on foundresses and by offspring fitness gradients over variation in ovule position. 4. Female fig wasps cannot leave their galls without male assistance. We found that females in outer ovules were unlikely to be released. Inner ovules thus have added value to foundresses, because their female offspring are more likely to mate and disperse. 5. For those offspring that did emerge, gall position (inner/outer) and body size did not influence the order in which female pollinators exited syconia, nor did early emerging wasps enjoy increased life spans. 6. We also found that the life spans of female wasps nearly doubled when given access to moisture. We suggest that conflict resolution in the fig-pollinator mutualism may thus be influenced by tropical seasonality, because wasps may be less able to over-exploit ovules in dry periods due to time constraints.

A classic example of a mutualism is the one between fig plants (Ficus) and their specialized and obligate pollinating wasps. The wasps deposit eggs in fig ovules, which the larvae then consume. Because the wasps derive their fitness only from consumed seeds, this mutualism can persist only if the wasps are prevented from laying eggs in all ovules. The search for mechanisms that can limit oviposition and stabilize the wasp-seed conflict has spanned more than three decades. We use a simple foraging model, parameterized with data from two Ficus species, to show how fig morphology reduces oviposition rates and helps to resolve the wasp-seed conflict. We also propose additional mechanisms, based on known aspects of fig biology, which can prevent even large numbers of wasps from ovipositing in all ovules. It has been suggested that in mutualistic symbioses, the partner that controls the physical resources, in this case Ficus, ultimately controls the rate at which hosts are converted to visitors, regardless of relative evolutionary rates. Our approach provides a mechanistic implementation of this idea, with potential applications to other mutualisms and to theories of virulence.

We consider the problematic relationship between publication success and statistical significance in the light of analyses in which we examine the distribution of published probability (P) values across the statistical ‘significance’ range, below the 5% probability threshold. P‐values are often judged according to whether they lie beneath traditionally accepted thresholds (< 0.05, < 0.01, < 0.001, < 0.0001); we examine how these thresholds influence the distribution of reported absolute P‐values in published scientific papers, the majority in biological sciences. We collected published P‐values from three leading journals, and summarized their distribution using the frequencies falling across and within these four threshold values between 0.05 and 0. These published frequencies were then fitted to three complementary null models which allowed us to predict the expected proportions of P‐values in the top and bottom half of each inter‐threshold interval (i.e. those lying below, as opposed to above, each P‐value threshold). Statistical comparison of these predicted proportions, against those actually observed, provides the first empirical evidence for a remarkable excess of probability values being cited on, or just below, each threshold relative to the smoothed theoretical distributions. The pattern is consistent across thresholds and journals, and for whichever theoretical approach used to generate our expected proportions. We discuss this novel finding and its implications for solving the problems of publication bias and selective reporting in evolutionary biology.