Relationship between a mutualist and a parasite of the laurel fig, <i>Ficus microcarpa</i> L.

Kobbi, May; Édelin, Claude; Michaloud, Georges; Chaïeb, Mohamed

doi:10.1139/z96-205

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rasplus et al, 1998). Non-pollinating fig wasps were thought to have a negative effect on the reproductive success of pollinator wasps (Herre, 1989;Kobbi et al, 1996;West et al, 1996). In contrast, the results from the work reported here suggest a positive correlativity between the numbers of non-pollinators and pollinators.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

Quantitative tests of interaction between pollinating and non‐pollinating fig wasps on dioeciousFicus hispida

Yan

Yang

Wang

2005

Ecological Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. The interaction between Ficus species and their pollinating wasps (Agaonidae) represents a striking example of a mutualism. Figs also shelter numerous non-pollinating chalcids that exploit the fig-pollinator mutualism. 2. Previous studies showed a weak negative correlation between numbers of pollinating and non-pollinating adults emerging from the same fruit. Little is known about the patterns and intensities of interactions between fig wasps. In the Xishuangbanna tropical rainforests of China, the dioecious Ficus hispida L. is pollinated by Ceratosolen solmsi marchali Mayr and is also exploited by the nonpollinators Philotrypesis pilosa Mayr, Philotrypesis sp., and Apocrypta bakeri Joseph. Here, the interaction of pollinator and non-pollinators on F. hispida is studied quantitatively. 3. The exact time of oviposition was determined for each species of fig wasp. Based on observational and experimental work it is suggested that (i) the relationship between pollinator and non-pollinators is a positive one, and that the genus Philotrypesis appears to have no significant impact on the pollinator population, whereas Apocrypta has a significant effect on both Philotrypesis and Ceratosolen; (ii) gall numbers do not always increase with increasing number of foundresses, but developmental mortality of larvae correlates positively with the number of foundresses; and (iii) there is a positive correlation between non-pollinator numbers and their rates of parasitism, but the three species of non-pollinators differed in their rates of parasitism and show different effects on pollinator production. 4. The rates of parasitism when combined with the coexistent percentage and developmental mortality, underpin the way non-pollinating fig wasps successfully exploit and coexist stably in a fig-pollinator mutualism.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

Quantitative tests of interaction between pollinating and non‐pollinating fig wasps on dioeciousFicus hispida

Yan

Yang

Wang

2005

Ecological Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1). As a result of its popularity as a street and ornamental tree, and the widespread introduction of its pollinators, F. microcarpa populations have become established in many tropical and subtropical areas, including the Mediter-ranean and Caribbean, mainland USA and Hawaii and Brazil (Nadel et al 1992;de Figueiredo et al 1995;Kobbi et al 1996;Beardsley 1998;Burrows and Burrows 2003;Starr et al 2003;van Noort et al 2013;Wang et al 2015). In urban environments, small plants can cause damage to buildings, but the plant can also become a serious invader of natural habitats (Mckey 1989;Beardsley 1998;Starr et al 2003;Corlett 2006;Caughlin et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insect responses to host plant provision beyond natural boundaries: latitudinal and altitudinal variation in a Chinese fig wasp community

Wang

Compton

Quinnell

et al. 2015

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many plants are grown outside their natural ranges. Plantings adjacent to native ranges provide an opportunity to monitor community assembly among associated insects and their parasitoids in novel environments, to determine whether gradients in species richness emerge and to examine their consequences for host plant reproductive success. We recorded the fig wasps (Chalcidoidea) associated with a single plant resource (ovules of Ficus microcarpa) along a 1200 km transect in southwest China that extended for 1000 km beyond the tree's natural northern range margin. The fig wasps included the tree's agaonid pollinator and other species that feed on the ovules or are their parasitoids. Phytophagous fig wasps (12 species) were more numerous than parasitoids (nine species). The proportion of figs occupied by fig wasps declined with increasing latitude, as did the proportion of utilized ovules in occupied figs. Species richness, diversity, and abundance of fig wasps also significantly changed along both latitudinal and altitudinal gradients. Parasitoids declined more steeply with latitude than phytophages. Seed production declined beyond the natural northern range margin, and at high elevation, because pollinator fig wasps became rare or absent. This suggests that pollinator climatic tolerances helped limit the tree's natural distribution, although competition with another species may have excluded pollinators at the highest altitude site. Isolation by distance may prevent colonization of northern sites by some fig wasps and act in combination with direct and host-mediated climatic effects to generate gradients in community composition, with parasitoids inherently more sensitive because of declines in the abundance of potential hosts.

show abstract

“…From the host plant's perspective, NPFWs can be seen as reducing male reproductive success (by reducing the number of pollen-carrying pollinator females), female reproductive success (by reducing seed production) or both. Gall-forming NPFWs can restrict both reproductive functions because they compete with pollinators for oviposition sites and occupy flowers that might have developed seeds (Kobbi et al, 1996). NPFW galls that develop quickly can also limit or prevent pollinator females from entering figs, and there may also be competition for nutrients within figs containing galls of different species.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of fig wasps (Chalcidoidea), new to the Mediterranean, on reproduction of an invasive fig tree Ficus microcarpa (Moraceae) and their potential for its biological control

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationship between a mutualist and a parasite of the laurel fig, Ficus microcarpa L.

Cited by 13 publications

References 6 publications

Quantitative tests of interaction between pollinating and non‐pollinating fig wasps on dioeciousFicus hispida

Quantitative tests of interaction between pollinating and non‐pollinating fig wasps on dioeciousFicus hispida

Insect responses to host plant provision beyond natural boundaries: latitudinal and altitudinal variation in a Chinese fig wasp community

The impact of fig wasps (Chalcidoidea), new to the Mediterranean, on reproduction of an invasive fig tree Ficus microcarpa (Moraceae) and their potential for its biological control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About