skip to main content

Title: Limitation by a shared mutualist promotes coexistence of multiple competing partners

Although mutualisms are often studied as simple pairwise interactions, they typically involve complex networks of interacting species. How multiple mutualistic partners that provide the same service and compete for resources are maintained in mutualistic networks is an open question. We use a model bacterial community in which multiple ‘partner strains’ ofEscherichia colicompete for a carbon source and exchange resources with a ‘shared mutualist’ strain ofSalmonella enterica. In laboratory experiments, competingE. colistrains readily coexist in the presence ofS. enterica, despite differences in their competitive abilities. We use ecological modeling to demonstrate that a shared mutualist can create temporary resource niche partitioning by limiting growth rates, even if yield is set by a resource external to a mutualism. This mechanism can extend to maintain multiple competing partner species. Our results improve our understanding of complex mutualistic communities and aid efforts to design stable microbial communities.

more » « less
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Nature Publishing Group
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Nature Communications
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract

    In nature, plant species simultaneously interact with many different mutualistic partners. These mutualists may influence one another through direct interference or indirectly by competing for shared reward resources or through alteration of plant traits. Together, these mutualists also may combine to affect plant hosts in ways that may not be predictable based on pairwise interactions. Given that the outcome of mutualistic interactions often depends on environmental conditions, multi‐mutualist effects on one another, and their plant hosts may be affected by global changes. Here, we grew focal plants under simulated global warming conditions and manipulated the presence of partner mutualists to test how warming affects the outcome of interactions between focal plants and their partners (nitrogen‐fixing rhizobia, ant defenders, and pollinators) and interactions among these partner mutualists. We find that warming alters the fitness benefits plants receive from rhizobium resource mutualists but not ant mutualists and that warming altered plant investment in all mutualists. We also find that mutualist partners interact, often by altering the availability of plant‐produced rewards that facilitate interactions with other partners. Our work illustrates that global changes may affect some but not all mutualisms, often asymmetrically (e.g., affecting investment in the mutualist partner but not plant host benefits) and also highlights the ubiquity of interactions between the multiple mutualists associating with a shared host.

    more » « less

    A key to understanding life's great diversity is discerning how competing organisms divide limiting resources to coexist in diverse communities. While temporal resource partitioning has long been hypothesized to reduce the negative effects of interspecific competition, empirical evidence suggests that time may not often be an axis along which animal species routinely subdivide resources. Here, we present evidence to the contrary in the world's most biodiverse group of animals: insect parasites (parasitoids). Specifically, we conducted a meta‐analysis of 64 studies from 41 publications to determine if temporal resource partitioningviavariation in the timing of a key life‐history trait, egg deposition (oviposition), mitigates interspecific competition between species pairs sharing the same insect host. When competing species were manipulated to oviposit at (or near) the same time in or on a single host in the laboratory, competition was common, and one species was typically inherently superior (i.e. survived to adulthood a greater proportion of the time). In most cases, however, the inferior competitor could gain a survivorship advantage by ovipositing earlier (or in a smaller number of cases later) into shared hosts. Moreover, this positive (or in a few cases negative) priority advantage gained by the inferior competitor increased as the interval between oviposition times became greater. The results from manipulative experiments were also correlated with patterns of life‐history timing and demography in nature: the more inherently competitively inferior a species was in the laboratory, the greater the interval between oviposition times of taxa in co‐occurring populations. Additionally, the larger the interval between oviposition times of competing taxa, the more abundant the inferior species was in populations where competitors were known to coexist. Overall, our findings suggest that temporal resource partitioningviavariation in oviposition timing may help to facilitate species coexistence and structures diverse insect communities by altering demographic measures of species success. We argue that the lack of evidence for a more prominent role of temporal resource partitioning in promoting species coexistence may reflect taxonomic differences, with a bias towards larger‐sized animals. For smaller species like parasitic insects that are specialized to attack one or a group of closely related hosts, have short adult lifespans and discrete generation times, compete directly for limited resources in small, closed arenas and have life histories constrained by host phenology, temporal resource subdivisionviavariation in life history may play a critical role in allowing species to coexist by alleviating the negative effects of interspecific competition.

    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    Species engage in mutually beneficial interspecific interactions (mutualisms) that shape their population dynamics in ecological communities. Species engaged in mutualisms vary greatly in their degree of dependence on their partner from complete dependence (e.g., yucca and yucca moth mutualism) to low dependence (e.g., generalist bee with multiple plant species). While current empirical studies show that, in mutualisms, partner dependence can alter the speed of a species' range expansion, there is no theory that provides conditions when expansion is sped up or slowed down. To address this, we built a spatially explicit model incorporating the population dynamics of two dispersing species interacting mutualistically. We explored how mutualisms impacted range expansion across a gradient of dependence (from complete independence to obligacy) between the two species. We then studied the conditions in which the magnitude of the mutualistic benefits could hinder versus enhance the speed of range expansion. We showed that either complete dependence, no dependence, or intermediate degree of dependence on a mutualist partner can lead to the greatest speeds of a focal species' range expansion based on the magnitude of benefits exchanged between partner species in the mutualism. We then showed how different degrees of dependence between species could alter the spatial distribution of the range expanding populations. Finally, we identified the conditions under which mutualistic interactions can turn exploitative across space, leading to the formation of a species' range limits. Our work highlights how couching mutualisms and mutualist dependence in a spatial context can provide insights about species range expansions, limits, and ultimately their distributions.

    more » « less
  4. Abstract

    Mutualistic relationships, such as those between plants and pollinators, may be vulnerable to the local extinctions predicted under global environmental change. However, network theory predicts that plant–pollinator networks can withstand species loss if pollinators switch to alternative floral resources (rewiring). Whether rewiring occurs following species loss in natural communities is poorly known because replicated species exclusions are difficult to implement at appropriate spatial scales.

    We experimentally removed a hummingbird‐pollinated plant,Heliconia tortuosa, from within tropical forest fragments to investigate how hummingbirds respond to temporary loss of an abundant resource. Under therewiring hypothesis, we expected that behavioural flexibility would allow hummingbirds to use alternative resources, leading to decreased ecological specialization and reorganization of the network structure (i.e. pairwise interactions). Alternatively, morphological or behavioural constraints—such as trait‐matching or interspecific competition—might limit the extent to which hummingbirds alter their foraging behaviour.

    We employed a replicated Before‐After‐Control‐Impact experimental design and quantified plant–hummingbird interactions using two parallel sampling methods: pollen collected from individual hummingbirds (‘pollen networks’, created from >300 pollen samples) and observations of hummingbirds visiting focal plants (‘camera networks’, created from >19,000 observation hours). To assess the extent of rewiring, we quantified ecological specialization at the individual, species and network levels and examined interaction turnover (i.e. gain/loss of pairwise interactions).

    H. tortuosaremoval caused some reorganization of pairwise interactions but did not prompt large changes in specialization, despite the large magnitude of our manipulation (on average, >100 inflorescences removed in exclusion areas of >1 ha). Although some individual hummingbirds sampled through time showed modest increases in niche breadth followingHeliconiaremoval (relative to birds that did not experience resource loss), these changes were not reflected in species‐ and network‐level specialization metrics.

    Our results suggest that, at least over short time‐scales, animals may not necessarily shift to alternative resources after losing an abundant food resource—even in species thought to be highly opportunistic foragers, such as hummingbirds. Given that rewiring contributes to theoretical predictions of network stability, future studies should investigate why pollinators might not expand their diets after a local resource extinction.

    more » « less
  5. Abstract

    Human‐mediated species introductions provide real‐time experiments in how communities respond to interspecific competition. For example, managed honey beesApis mellifera(L.) have been widely introduced outside their native range and may compete with native bees for pollen and nectar. Indeed, multiple studies suggest that honey bees and native bees overlap in their use of floral resources. However, for resource overlap to negatively impact resource collection by native bees, resource availability must also decline, and few studies investigate impacts of honey bee competition on native bee floral visits and floral resource availability simultaneously.

    In this study, we investigate impacts of increasing honey bee abundance on native bee visitation patterns, pollen diets, and nectar and pollen resource availability in two Californian landscapes: wildflower plantings in the Central Valley and montane meadows in the Sierra.

    We collected data on bee visits to flowers, pollen and nectar availability, and pollen carried on bee bodies across multiple sites in the Sierra and Central Valley. We then constructed plant‐pollinator visitation networks to assess how increasing honey bee abundance impacted perceived apparent competition (PAC), a measure of niche overlap, and pollinator specialization (d'). We also compared PAC values against null expectations to address whether observed changes in niche overlap were greater or less than what we would expect given the relative abundances of interacting partners.

    We find clear evidence of exploitative competition in both ecosystems based on the following results: (1) honey bee competition increased niche overlap between honey bees and native bees, (2) increased honey bee abundance led to decreased pollen and nectar availability in flowers, and (3) native bee communities responded to competition by shifting their floral visits, with some becoming more specialized and others becoming more generalized depending on the ecosystem and bee taxon considered.

    Although native bees can adapt to honey bee competition by shifting their floral visits, the coexistence of honey bees and native bees is tenuous and will depend on floral resource availability. Preserving and augmenting floral resources is therefore essential in mitigating negative impacts of honey bee competition. In two California ecosystems, honey bee competition decreases pollen and nectar resource availability in flowers and alters native bee diets with potential implications for bee conservation and wildlands management.

    more » « less