Interphyletic relationships in the use of nesting cavities: mutualism, competition and amensalism among hymenopterans and vertebrates

Abstract

Although competition is usually assumed to be the most common interaction between closely related organisms that share limiting resources, the relationships linking distant taxa that use the same nesting sites are poorly understood. In the present study, we examine the interactions among social hymenopterans (honeybees and wasps) and vertebrates in tropical ecosystems of East Africa. By analysing the preferences of these three groups for nest boxes that were empty or previously occupied by a different taxon, we try to establish whether the relationships among them are commensal, mutualistic, competitive or amensal. Vertebrates and honeybees selected nest boxes that had previously been occupied by the other, which suggests that each obtains some benefit from the other. This relationship can be considered mutualistic, although a mutual preference for each others' nests does not exclude a competitive interaction. Vertebrates and wasps preferred nest boxes not previously occupied by the other, which suggests that they compete for tree cavities. Finally, wasps seemed to completely refuse cavities previously used by honeybees, while the bees occupied cavities regardless of whether they had been previously used by wasps, an apparently amensal relationship. These results indicate that the interdependence between distantly related taxa is stronger and more complex than previously described, which may have important implications for population dynamics and community structure.

Notes on an interspecific interaction between distant taxa: Observation of active cohabitation and communal nesting resources between Gehyra mutilata (Wiegmann, 1834) and two vespid wasp species

“…Previous observations of nesting interactions or associations within the Gekkonidae family have been reported in Lygodactylus thomensis wermuthi , Hemidactylus flaviviridis , H. turcinus and Tarentola mauritanica ; however of note, these were utilizing abandoned or inactive solitary wasp nests (e.g. Rodriguez‐Prieto et al, 2010; Veiga et al, 2013a) or an active bird colony nesting site (Gory, 2011).…”

“…One or all species positively benefitting from the ecological interaction likely indicates a mutualistic (+, +) or commensal (+, 0) ecological interaction. These interactions could be considered mutualistic, with reciprocal fitness benefits for the species establishing the nesting site experienced no obvious detrimental fitness cost, but likely benefited from additional protection and maintenance of a nesting site or mechanical barriers reducing parasites and pathogens (Doody et al, 2009; Servigne et al, 2020; Veiga et al, 2013a) and the two other species benefiting from utilizing an existing nesting resource.…”

“…Gecko species Hemidactylus turcinus and Tarentola mauritanica feeding on insects within common swift ( Apus apus ) nesting cavities; Gory, 2011); or mutualistic interactions (+, +) (e.g. Interchangeable nesting cavity use between social hymenopterans (honey bees and wasps) and vertebrates; Veiga et al, 2013a). Of note, strong competition has been reported to occur between distant taxa (Hochberg & Lawton, 1990).…”

“…There are several hypotheses for why communal nesting and cohabitation between distant taxa occur including (i) additive nest maintenance and protection from parasites and predators (mutualism: +, +; e.g. preference of using nesting cavities previously occupied by social hymenopterans and vertebrates; Veiga et al, 2013a); (ii) increased reproductive success and development of favourable offspring phenotypes through microsite selection or improved thermal regimes (commensalism: +, 0; e.g. Andros Iguana ( Cyclura cychlura cychlura ) cohabitating in termitaria with favourable thermal regimes, Knapp & Owens, 2008); (iii) interspecific tolerance or habituation when nesting resources are a limiting factor (amensalism: 0, −; e.g.…”

“…Andros Iguana ( Cyclura cychlura cychlura ) cohabitating in termitaria with favourable thermal regimes, Knapp & Owens, 2008); (iii) interspecific tolerance or habituation when nesting resources are a limiting factor (amensalism: 0, −; e.g. avoiding nesting cavity use between honey bees and wasps; Veiga et al, 2013a) or (iv) opportunistic predation (+, −; e.g. northern house gecko Hemidactylus flaviviridis cohabitating with and predating on stingless bees ( Trigona iridipennis ), Vyas, 2012).…”