Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
Escuela de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Estatal a Distancia (UNED), San Pedro de Montes de Oca, San José, Costa Rica.
PLoS Biol. 2023 Dec 27;21(12):e3002434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002434. eCollection 2023 Dec.
Mutualistic interactions, such as plant-mycorrhizal or plant-pollinator interactions, are widespread in ecological communities and frequently exploited by cheaters, species that profit from interactions without providing benefits in return. Cheating usually negatively affects the fitness of the individuals that are cheated on, but the effects of cheating at the community level remains poorly understood. Here, we describe 2 different kinds of cheating in mutualistic networks and use a generalized Lotka-Volterra model to show that they have very different consequences for the persistence of the community. Conservative cheating, where a species cheats on its mutualistic partners to escape the cost of mutualistic interactions, negatively affects community persistence. In contrast, innovative cheating occurs with species with whom legitimate interactions are not possible, because of a physiological or morphological barrier. Innovative cheating can enhance community persistence under some conditions: when cheaters have few mutualistic partners, cheat at low or intermediate frequency and the cost associated with mutualism is not too high. Under these conditions, the negative effects of cheating on partner persistence are overcompensated at the community level by the positive feedback loops that arise in diverse mutualistic communities. Using an empirical dataset of plant-bird interactions (hummingbirds and flowerpiercers), we found that observed cheating patterns are highly consistent with theoretical cheating patterns found to increase community persistence. This result suggests that the cheating patterns observed in nature could contribute to promote species coexistence in mutualistic communities, instead of necessarily destabilizing them.
互利共生相互作用,如植物-菌根或植物-传粉者相互作用,在生态群落中广泛存在,并且经常被骗子利用,这些物种从相互作用中受益而不提供回报。欺骗通常会对被欺骗的个体的适应性产生负面影响,但在群落水平上的欺骗的影响仍知之甚少。在这里,我们描述了互利共生网络中的 2 种不同类型的欺骗,并使用广义的Lotka-Volterra 模型表明,它们对群落的持久性有非常不同的影响。保守型欺骗,其中一种物种欺骗其互利共生伙伴以逃避互利共生的代价,会对群落的持久性产生负面影响。相比之下,创新性欺骗发生在那些由于生理或形态障碍而无法与合法伙伴进行互利共生的物种身上。在某些条件下,创新性欺骗可以增强群落的持久性:当骗子的互利共生伙伴较少,欺骗的频率较低或中等,并且与互利共生相关的成本不太高时。在这些条件下,多样性互利共生群落中出现的正反馈循环,弥补了欺骗对伙伴持久性的负面影响,从而使社区得以维持。利用植物-鸟类相互作用(蜂鸟和花食性鸟类)的经验数据集,我们发现观察到的欺骗模式与理论上发现的增加社区持久性的欺骗模式高度一致。这一结果表明,自然界中观察到的欺骗模式可能有助于促进互利共生群落中的物种共存,而不是必然破坏它们。