Convergence and coevolution in a mutualism: Evidence from a molecular phylogeny of Ficus

Evolution

Volumn 57, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1255-1269

  Jousselin, Emmanuelle ^a,c   Rasplus, Jean Yves ^b   Kjellberg, Finn ^a  

^a CENTRE D ECOLOGIE FONCTIONNELLE ET EVOLUTIVE   (France)

^b CENTRE DE BIOLOGIE ET DE GESTION DES POPULATIONS   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Active pollination; Coadaptation; Comparative analysis; Figs; Parametric bootstrap; Phylogeny

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; COEVOLUTION; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; MUTUALISM; PHYLOGENY; PLANT-INSECT INTERACTION; POLLINATION;

AGAONIDAE; ANIMALIA; CHALCIDOIDEA; EMBRYOPHYTA; FICUS; FICUS (ANGIOSPERM); HYMENOPTERA; INSECTA; MORACEAE; VESPIDAE;

EID: 0037626869     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00334.x     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Armbruster, W. S. 1992. Phylogeny and the evolution of plant-animal interactions. Bioscience 42:12-20.
2. Armbruster, W. S., Debevec E. M., and M. F. Willson 2002. Evolution of syncarpy in angiosperms: theoretical and phylogenetic analyses of the effects of carpel fusion on offspring quantity and quality. J. Evol. Biol. 15:657-672.
3. Baldwin, B. G., and S. Markos. 1998. Phylogenetic utility of the external transcribed spacer (ETS) of 18S-26S rDNA: congruence of ETS and ITS trees of Calycadenia (Compositae). Mol. Phyl. Evol 10:449-463.
4. Béna, G., M. F. Jubier, I. Olivieri, and B. Lejeune. 1998. Ribosomal external and internal transcribed spacers: combined use in the phylogenetic analysis of Medicago (Leguminosae). J. Mol. Evol. 46:299-306.
5. Berg, C. C. 1989. Classification and distribution of Ficus. Experientia 45:605-611.
6. _. 1990. Reproduction and evolution of Ficus (Moraceae): traits connected with the adequate rearing of pollinators. Mem. NY Bot. Gard. 55:169-185.
7. Berg, C. C., and J. T. Wiebes. 1992. African fig trees and fig wasps. North Holland, Amsterdam.
8. Brooks, D., and D. E. McLennan. 1991. Phylogeny, ecology, and behavior. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
9. Brouat, C., N. Garcia, C. Andary, and D. Mckey. 2001. Plant lock and ant key: pairwise coevolution of an exclusion filter in an ant-plant mutualism. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268:2131-2141.
10. Clayton, D. H., P. L. M. Lee, D. M. Tompkins, and E. D. Brodie III. 1999. Reciprocal natural selection on host-parasite phenotypes. Am. Nat. 154:261-270.
11. Corner, E. J. H. 1965. Check-list of Ficus in Asia and Autralasia with keys to identification. Gard. Bull. Singapore 19:385-401.
12. Cunningham, C. W. 1997. Can three incongruence tests predict when data should be combined? Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:733-740.
13. Desfeux, C., S. Maurice, J. P. Henry, B. Lejeune, and P. H. Gouyon. 1996. Evolution of reproductive systems in the genus Silene. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263:409-414.
14. Dowton, M., and A. D. Austin 2002. Increased congruence does not necessarily indicate increase phylogenetic accuracy - the behavior of the incongruence length difference test in mixed-model analysis. Syst. Biol 51:19-31.
15. Doyle, J. J., and J. L. Doyle. 1987. A rapid DNS isolation procedure for small amounts of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem. Bull. 19: 11-15.
16. Emerson, B. C., P. Oromi, and G. M. Hewitt. 2000. Interpreting colonisation of the Calathus (Coleoptera: Carbidae) on the Canary Islands and Madeira through the application of parametric bootstrap. Evolution 54:2081-2090.
17. Eriksson, T., 1998, AutoDecay Ver. 4.0. Program distributed by the author. Bergius Foundation, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm.
18. Farris, J. S., M. Kallersjö, A. G. Kluge, and C. Bult. 1994. testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315-319.
19. Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791.
20. Frank, S. A. 1984. The behaviour and morphology of the fig wasps Pegoscapus assuetus and P. jimenezi: descriptions and suggested behavioral characters for phylogenetic studies. Psyche 91: 289-308.
21. Galil, J. 1973. Pollination in dioecious figs: pollination of Ficus fistulosa by Ceratosolen hewitii. Gard. Bull. Singapore 26: 303-311.
22. Galil, J., and D. Eisikowitch. 1969. Further studies on the pollination ecology of Ficus sycomorus L. (Hymenoptera, Clacidoidea, Agaonidae). Tijdschr. Entomol. 112:1-13.
23. Galil, J., and G. Neeman. 1977. Pollen transfer and pollination in the common fig (Ficus carica L.). New Phytol. 79:163-171.
24. Galil, J., and L. Meiri. 1981. Number and structure of anthers in fig syconia in relation to behaviour of the pollen vectors. New Phytol. 88:83-87.
25. Greeff, J. M., and S. G. Compton. 1996. Sequential oviposition and optimal sex ratios in pollinating fig wasps. Ecol. Entomol. 21: 300-302.
26. Harvey, P. H., and M. D. Pagel. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, U. K.
27. Herre, E. A. 1989. Coevolution of reproductive characteristics in 12 species of New World figs and their pollinator wasps. Experientia 45:637-647.
28. Herre, E. A. and S. A. West. 1997. Conflict of interest in a mutualism: documenting the elusive fig wasp-seed trade-off. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264:1501-1507.
29. Herre, E. A., C. A. Machado, E. Bermingham, J. D. Nason, D. M. Windsor, S. S. MacCafferty, W. Van Houthen, and K. Bachman. 1996. Molecular phylogenies of figs and their pollinator wasps. J. Biogeogr. 23:521-530.
30. Hossaert-McKey, M., M. Gibernau, and J. E. Frey. 1994. Chemosensory attraction of fig wasps to substances produced by receptive figs. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 70:185-191.
31. Huelsenbeck, J. P., D. M. Hillis, and R. Jones. 1996. Parametric bootstrapping in molecular phylogenetics: applications and performance. Pages 19-45 in J. D. Ferraris and S. R. Palumbi, eds. Molecular zoology: advances, strategies, and Protocols. Wiley-Liss, New York.
32. Janzen, D. H. 1979. How to be a fig. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 10: 13-51.
33. Janzen, D. H. 1980. When is it coevolution? Evolution 34:611-612.
34. Jousselin, E., and F. Kjellberg. 2001. The functional implications of active and passive pollination in dioecious figs. Ecol. Lett. 4:151-158.
35. Jousselin, E., M. Hossaert-McKey, D. Vernet, and F. Kjellberg. 2001. Egg deposition patterns of fig pollinating wasps: implications for studies on the stability of the mutualism. Ecol. Entomol. 26:602-608.
36. Jousselin, E., M. Hossaert-McKey, E. A. Herre, and F. Kjellberg. 2003. Why do fig wasps actively pollinate monoecious figs? Oecologia 134:381-387.
37. Kerdelhué, C., and J.-Y. Rasplus. 1996. The evolution of Dioecy among Ficus (Moraceae): an alternative hypothesis involving non-pollinating fig wasp pressure on the fig-pollinator mutualism. Oikos 77:163-166.
38. Kjellberg, F., and S. Maurice 1989. Seasonality in the reproductive phenology of Ficus - its evolution and consequences. Experientia 45:653-660.
39. Kjellberg, F., E. Jousselin, J. L. Bronstein, A. Patel, J. Yokoyama, and J.-Y. Rasplus. 2001. Pollination mode in fig wasps: the predictive power of correlated traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 1113-1121.
40. Kjellberg, F., P. H. Gouyon, M. Raymond, and G. Valdeyron. 1987. The stability of the symbiosis between dioecious figs and their pollinators: a study of Ficus carica L. and Blastophaga psenes L. Evolution 41:693-704.
41. Lauder, G. V., A. M. Leroi, and M. R. Rose. 1993. Adaptations and history. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8:294-297.
42. Lopez-Vaamonde, C., J.-Y. Rasplus, G. D. Weiblen, and J. M. Cook. 2001. Molecular phylogenies of fig wasps: partial cocladogenesis of pollinators and parasites. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 21: 55-71.
43. Machado, C., E. Jousselin, F. Kjellberg, S. G. Compton, and E. A. Herre. 2001. Phylogenetic relationships, historical biogeography and character evolution of fig pollinating wasps. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268:685-694.
44. Maddison, W. P., and D. R. Maddison. 1990. MacClade: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland MA.
45. Morand, S. 1996. Life history traits in parasitic nematodes: a comparative approach for the search of invariants. Funct. Ecol. 10: 210-218.
46. Pagel, M. D. 1994. Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 255:37-45.
47. Patifio, S., M. T. Tyree, and E. A. Herre. 1995. Comparison of hydraulic architecture of woody plants of differing phylogeny and growth form with special reference to freestanding and hemiepiphytic Ficus species from Panama. New Phytol. 129:125-134.
48. Posada, D., and K. A. Crandall. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14:817-818.
49. Putz, F. E., and N. M. Holbrook. 1986. Notes on the natural history of hemiepiphytes. Selbyana 9:61-69.
50. Rambault, A., and N. C. Grassly. 1997. Seq-gen: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 13:235-238.
51. Ramirez, W. 1974. Coevolution of Ficus and Agaonidae. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 61:770-780.
52. Randal Linder, C., L. R. Goertzen, B. Vanden Heuvel, J. Francisco-Ortega, and R. K. Jansen. 2000. The complete external transcribed spacer of 18S-26S rDNA: amplification and phylogenetic utility at low taxonomic levels in Asteraceae and closely allied families. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 14:285-303.
53. Rasplus, J.-Y. 1996. The one-to-one species specificity of the Ficus-Agaonidae mutualism: how casual? Pp. 639-649 in L. J. G. Van der Maesen, X. M. Van der Burgt, and J. M. Van Medenbach de Rooy, eds. The biodiversity of African plants. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
54. Renner, S., A. E. Swarzbach, and L. Lohman. 1997. Phylogenetic position and floral function of Siparuna (Siparunacae, Laurales). Int. J. Plant Sci. S89-S98.
55. Sorci, G., S. Morand, and J. P. Hugot. 1997. Host-parasite coevolution: comparative evidence for covariation of life history traits in primates and oxyurid parasites. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264: 285-289.
56. Swofford, D. L. 1999. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.
57. Templeton, A. R. 1993. The Eve hypothesis: a genetic critique and reanalysis. Am. Anthropol. 95:51-72.
58. Thompson, J. D., D. G. Higgins, and T. J. Gibson. 1994. ClustalW: improving sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignments through sequence weighting, position specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res. 22: 4673-4680.
59. Valdeyron, G., and D. G. Lloyd. 1979. Sex differences and flowering phenology of the common fig, Ficus carica L. Evolution 33:673-685.
60. Van Noort, S. and S. G. Compton. 1996. Convergent evolution of agaonine and sycoecine (Agaonidae, Chalcidoidea) head shape in response to the constraints of host fig morphology. J. Biogeogr. 23:415-424.
61. Verkerke, W. 1989. Structure and function of the fig. Experientia 45:612-622.
62. Weiblen, G. D. 2000. Phylogenetic relationships of functionally dioecious Ficus (Moraceae) based on ribosomal DNA sequences and morphology. Am. J. Bot. 87:1342-1357.
63. _. 2001. Phylogenetic relationships of fig wasps pollinating functionally dioecious Ficus based on mitochondrial DNA sequences and morphology. Syst. Biol 50:1-25.
64. Weiblen, G. D., and G. L. Bush. 2002. Speciation in fig pollinators and parasites. Mol. Ecol. 11:1573-1578.
65. Wiebes, J. T. 1991. Agaonidae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea) and Ficus (Moraceae); fig wasps and their figs, VII (Pleistodontes). Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet. Ser. C. 94:137-152.
66. _. 1994. The Indo-Australian Agaoninae (pollinators of figs). North Holland, Amsterdam.
67. _. 1995. The New World Agaoninae (pollinators of figs). North Holland, Amsterdam.