IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0014308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefits for Plants in Ant-Plant Protective Mutualisms: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew D Trager
  • Smriti Bhotika
  • Jeffrey A Hostetler
  • Gilda V Andrade
  • Mariano A Rodriguez-Cabal
  • C Seabird McKeon
  • Craig W Osenberg
  • Benjamin M Bolker

Abstract

Costs and benefits for partners in mutualistic interactions can vary greatly, but surprisingly little is known about the factors that drive this variation across systems. We conducted a meta-analysis of ant-plant protective mutualisms to quantify the effects of ant defenders on plant reproductive output, to evaluate if reproductive effects were predicted from reductions in herbivory and to identify characteristics of the plants, ants and environment that explained variation in ant protection. We also compared our approach with two other recent meta-analyses on ant-plant mutualisms, emphasizing differences in our methodology (using a weighted linear mixed effects model) and our focus on plant reproduction rather than herbivore damage. Based on 59 ant and plant species pairs, ant presence increased plant reproductive output by 49% and reduced herbivory by 62%. The effects on herbivory and reproduction within systems were positively correlated, but the slope of this relationship (0.75) indicated that tolerance to foliar herbivory may be a common plant response to absence of ant guards. Furthermore, the relationship between foliar damage and reproduction varied substantially among systems, suggesting that herbivore damage is not a reliable surrogate for fitness consequences of ant protection. Studies that experimentally excluded ants reported a smaller effect of ant protection on plant reproduction than studies that relied upon natural variation in ant presence, suggesting that study methods can affect results in these systems. Of the ecological variables included in our analysis, only plant life history (i.e., annual or perennial) explained variation in the protective benefit of mutualistic ants: presence of ants benefitted reproduction of perennials significantly more than that of annuals. These results contrast with other quantitative reviews of these relationships that did not include plant life history as an explanatory factor and raise several questions to guide future research on ant-plant protection mutualisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew D Trager & Smriti Bhotika & Jeffrey A Hostetler & Gilda V Andrade & Mariano A Rodriguez-Cabal & C Seabird McKeon & Craig W Osenberg & Benjamin M Bolker, 2010. "Benefits for Plants in Ant-Plant Protective Mutualisms: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(12), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0014308
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0014308
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0014308&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0014308?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. G. Willmer & G. N. Stone, 1997. "How aggressive ant-guards assist seed-set in Acacia flowers," Nature, Nature, vol. 388(6638), pages 165-167, July.
    2. Maureen L. Stanton & Todd M. Palmer & Truman P. Young & Amanda Evans & Monica L. Turner, 1999. "Sterilization and canopy modification of a swollen thorn acacia tree by a plant-ant," Nature, Nature, vol. 401(6753), pages 578-581, October.
    3. Roosa Leimu & Markus Fischer, 2008. "A Meta-Analysis of Local Adaptation in Plants," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(12), pages 1-8, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kadambari Devarajan, 2016. "The Antsy Social Network: Determinants of Nest Structure and Arrangement in Asian Weaver Ants," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Kostas Ioannidis & Marianthi Tsakaldimi & Katerina Koutsovoulou & Evangelia N. Daskalakou & Petros Ganatsas, 2021. "Effect of Seedling Provenance and Site Heterogeneity on Abies cephalonica Performance in a Post-Fire Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Leonardo Caproni & Lorenzo Raggi & Salvatore Ceccarelli & Valeria Negri & Andrea Carboni, 2019. "In-Depth Characterisation of Common Bean Diversity Discloses Its Breeding Potential for Sustainable Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Gaëlle van Frank & Pierre Rivière & Sophie Pin & Raphaël Baltassat & Jean-François Berthellot & François Caizergues & Christian Dalmasso & Jean-Sébastien Gascuel & Alexandre Hyacinthe & Florent Mercie, 2020. "Genetic Diversity and Stability of Performance of Wheat Population Varieties Developed by Participatory Breeding," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Tuomas Hämälä & Amanda J Gorton & David A Moeller & Peter Tiffin, 2020. "Pleiotropy facilitates local adaptation to distant optima in common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia)," PLOS Genetics, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-23, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0014308. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.