skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Host plant phenology shapes aphid abundance and interactions with ants
Phenological mismatch can occur when plants and herbivores differentially respond to changing phenological cues, such as temperature or snow melt date. This often shifts herbivore feeding to plant stages of lower quality. How herbivores respond to plant quality may be also mediated by temperature, which could lead to temperature-by-phenology interactions. We examined how aphid abundance and mutualism with ants were impacted by temperature and host plant phenology. In this study system, aphids Aphis asclepiadis colonize flowering stalks of the host plant, Ligusticum porteri. Like other aphids, abundance of this species is dependent on ant protection. To understand how host plant phenology and temperature affect aphid abundance, we used a multiyear observational study and a field experiment. We observed 20 host plant populations over five years (2017–2021), tracking temperature and snow melt date as well as host plant phenology and insect abundance. We found host plant and aphid phenology to differentially respond to temperature and snow melt timing. Early snow melt accelerated host plant phenology to a greater extent than aphid phenology, which was more responsive to temperature. Both the likelihood of aphid colony establishment and ant recruitment were reduced when aphids colonized host plants at post-flowering stages. In 2019, we experimentally accelerated host plant phenology by advancing snow melt date by two weeks. We factorially combined this treatment with open top warming chambers surrounding aphid colonies. Greatest growth occurred for colonies under ambient temperatures when they occurred on host plants at the flowering stage. Altogether, our results suggest that phenological mismatch with host plants can decrease aphid abundance, and this effect is exacerbated by temperature increases and changes to the ant–aphid mutualism.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1655914
PAR ID:
10379663
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Oikos
ISSN:
0030-1299
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Arthropod-Plant Interactions)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract Declining snow cover is reshaping ecological communities. Early loss of snow cover initiates changes in key interactions that mediate herbivore abundance, i.e., top-down and bottom-up effects. In this study, we used a field experiment to test the effects of host plant water stress and phenology on the multitrophic interactions that determine aphid abundance. The aphid, Aphis asclepiadis , in our study system colonizes the flowering stalks of the host plant Ligusticum porteri and relies on a protection mutualism with ants. We added snow and water to replicate host plants and tested for a variety of phenological and physiological responses to these treatments. Relative to host plants in ambient conditions, both water and snow addition reduced key signals of water stress (senescence and abscisic acid levels) and increased seed set. While aphid colonies were generally larger with reduced host plant water stress, the ant–aphid mutualism interacted with plant quality in complex ways. Without ant tending, we did not detect differences in aphid colony growth with host plant treatment. When tended by ants, aphid colony growth was greatest on host plants with snow addition. Host plant quality also altered the benefits exchanged in this mutualism. Ant-tended colonies hosted by plants with snow addition produced honeydew enriched in trehalose, which may have decreased both ant and natural enemy abundance. Our results suggest that early loss of snow reduces aphid abundance by creating low-quality, water-stressed host plants, and this effect may be exacerbated by natural enemies and the costs of ant attendance. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata)
    Abstract Ant‐hemipteran mutualisms are keystone interactions that can be variously affected by warming: these mutualisms can be strengthened or weakened, or the species can transition to new mutualist partners. We examined the effects of elevated temperatures on an ant‐aphid mutualism in the subalpine zone of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado, USA. In this system, inflorescences of the host plant,Ligusticum porteriCoult. & Rose (Apiaceae), are colonized by the ant‐tended aphidAphis asclepiadisFitch or less frequently by the non‐ant tended aphidCavariella aegopodii(Scopoli) (both Hemiptera: Aphididae). Using an 8‐year observational study, we tested for two key mechanisms by which ant‐hemipteran mutualisms may be altered by climate change: shifts in species identity and phenological mismatch. Whereas the aphid species colonizing the host plant is not changing in response to year‐to‐year variation in temperature, we found evidence that a phenological mismatch between ants and aphids could occur. In warmer years, colonization of host plant inflorescences by ants is decreased, whereas forA. asclepiadisaphids, host plant colonization is mostly responsive to date of snowmelt. We also experimentally establishedA. asclepiadiscolonies on replicate host plants at ambient and elevated temperatures. Ant abundance did not differ between aphid colonies at ambient vs. elevated temperatures, but ants were less likely to engage in tending behaviors on aphid colonies at elevated temperatures. Sugar composition of aphid honeydew was also altered by experimental warming. Despite reduced tending by ants, aphid colonies at elevated temperatures had fewer intraguild predators. Altogether, our results suggest that higher temperatures may disrupt this ant‐aphid mutualism through both phenological mismatch and by altering benefits exchanged in the interaction. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; (, Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution)
    Phenological shifts are a widely studied consequence of climate change. Little is known, however, about certain critical phenological events, nor about mechanistic links between shifts in different life-history stages of the same organism. Among angiosperms, flowering times have been observed to advance with climate change, but, whether fruiting times shift as a direct consequence of shifting flowering times, or respond differently or not at all to climate change, is poorly understood. Yet, shifts in fruiting could alter species interactions, including by disrupting seed dispersal mutualisms. In the absence of long-term data on fruiting phenology, but given extensive data on flowering, we argue that an understanding of whether flowering and fruiting are tightly linked or respond independently to environmental change can significantly advance our understanding of how fruiting phenologies will respond to warming climates. Through a case study of biotically and abiotically dispersed plants, we present evidence for a potential functional link between the timing of flowering and fruiting. We then propose general mechanisms for how flowering and fruiting life history stages could be functionally linked or independently driven by external factors, and we use our case study species and phenological responses to distinguish among proposed mechanisms in a real-world framework. Finally, we identify research directions that could elucidate which of these mechanisms drive the timing between subsequent life stages. Understanding how fruiting phenology is altered by climate change is essential for all plant species but is particularly critical to sustaining the large numbers of plant species that rely on animal-mediated dispersal, as well as the animals that rely on fruit for sustenance. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, Ecological Entomology)
    1. Some interactions previously described as mutualistic were revealed to be commensal or parasitic in subsequent investigations. Ant‐mediated seed dispersal has been described as a mutualism for more than a century; however, recent research suggests that it may be commensal or parasitic. Plants demonstrably benefit from ant‐mediated seed dispersal, although there is little evidence available to demonstrate that the interaction benefits long‐term ant fitness. 2. Field experiments were conducted in temperate North America focused on a key seed‐dispersing ant. All herbaceous plants were removed from a forest understorey for 13 years, and supplemented ant colonies with large elaiosome‐bearing seeds aiming to examine potential long‐ and short‐term myrmecochorous plant benefits for the ants. 3. If elaiosome‐bearing seeds benefit ants, suggesting a mutualistic relationship, it is expected that there would be greater worker and/or alate abundance and greater fat reserves (colony lipid content) with seed supplementation (short‐term) and in areas with high understorey herb abundance. 4. Short‐term seed supplementation of ant colonies did not result in an increase with respect to numbers or fat stores, although it did prompt the production of colony sexuals, which is a potential fitness benefit. In the long term, however, there was no positive effect on the ants and, instead, there were negative effects because the removal of elaiosome‐bearing plants corresponded with greater colony health. 5. The data obtained in the present study suggest that the ant–plant interaction ranged from occasionally beneficial to neutral to overall negative for the ant partner. Such results did not support considering the interaction as a mutualism. Collectively, the data suggest the need to reconsider the nature of the relationship between these ants and plants. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Evolutionary Applications)
    ABSTRACT Successful plant growth requires plants to minimize harm from antagonists and maximize benefit from mutualists. However, these outcomes may be difficult to achieve simultaneously, since plant defenses activated in response to antagonists can compromise mutualism function, and plant resources allocated to defense may trade off with resources allocated to managing mutualists. Here, we investigate how antagonist attack affects plant ability to manage mutualists with sanctions, in which a plant rewards cooperative mutualists and/or punishes uncooperative mutualists. We studied interactions among wild and domesticated pea plants, pea aphids, an aphid‐vectored virus (Pea Enation Mosaic Virus, PEMV), and mutualistic rhizobial bacteria that fix nitrogen in root nodules. Using isogenic rhizobial strains that differ in their ability to fix nitrogen and express contrasting fluorescent proteins, we found that peas demonstrated sanctions in both singly‐infected nodules and mixed‐infection nodules containing both strains. However, the plant's ability to manage mutualists in mixed‐infection nodules traded off with its ability to defend against antagonists: when plants were attacked by aphids, they stopped sanctioning within mixed‐infection nodules, and plants that exerted stricter sanctions within nodules during aphid attack accumulated higher levels of the aphid‐vectored virus, PEMV. Our findings suggest that plants engaged in defense against antagonists suffer a reduced ability to select for the most beneficial symbionts in mixed‐infection tissues. Mixed‐infection tissues may be relatively common in this mutualism, and reduced plant sanctions in these tissues could provide a refuge for uncooperative mutualists and compromise the benefit that plants obtain from mutualistic symbionts during antagonist attack. Understanding the conflicting selective pressures plants face in complex biotic environments will be crucial for breeding crop varieties that can maximize benefits from mutualists even when they encounter antagonists. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email