Theoretical Advances in the Ecology and Evolution of Mutualistic Interactions – Review of a Symposium ( SYMP 14) Organized at ESA + CSEE 2022 Joint Meeting
Theoretical Advances in the Ecology and Evolution of Mutualistic Interactions – Review of a Symposium ( SYMP 14) Organized at ESA + CSEE 2022 Joint Meeting
复制标题
生态学和互惠相互作用演化的理论进展 – ESA 举办的研讨会 (SYMP 14) 回顾 – – CSEE 2022 联席会议
DOI：
10.1002/bes2.2057
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
McPeek, Sarah J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Narayanan, Naven;Hale, Kayla R.;Koffel, Thomas;McPeek, Sarah J.
互惠是种间双向的、有益的相互作用，普遍存在于各分类群中(Bronstein 2015)。它们对生态系统功能和养分循环有重大贡献。例如，全球约40%的粮食作物依靠互惠伙伴授粉(Klein等人。2007)。微生物互助体，特别是菌根真菌和固氮菌，负责每年植物磷吸收的75%和氮吸收的很大一部分(van der Heijden等人)。2008年)。为了更好地理解这些相互作用，我们需要一个总体的理论框架。这是因为经验结果很容易被系统特定的相互作用的差异、时间尺度问题和生态数据中的噪音所混淆。发展互惠关系的理论受到几个挑战的困扰。首先，互惠互利在它们交换的利益货币上是高度多样化的。在植物-微生物互惠作用中，交换的利益通常是营养资源(碳和磷，或碳和氮)(Hacskaylo 1972，Oldroyd等人)。2011年)。然而，在植物-传粉者互惠关系中，传粉者以花蜜的形式获得好处，而植物则以传粉者促进花粉移动的形式获得好处(Pellmyr等人。1996年，Pellmyr 2003)。利益形式的多样性使开发一种可适用于不同互动类型的互惠互利种群动力学理论具有挑战性。此外，互惠关系通常是时间上的动态相互作用，其中物种之间交换的利益往往通过特征进化来调节。例如，植物根据它们从细菌获得的氮素益处来批准它们向不同根瘤中的根瘤菌提供多少碳(Denison 2000，West等人)。2002年)。类似地，植物进化到败育被授粉者幼虫寄生的果实，以防止利用(Janzen1979，James等人)。(1994年)。在这两种情况下，进化在稳定互利互动动态和物种种群动态方面起着至关重要的作用。因此，整合进化
Mutualisms are bidirectional, beneficial interspecific interactions ubiquitous across taxa (Bronstein 2015). They contribute significantly to ecosystem function and nutrient cycling. For instance,~ 40% of global food crops are dependent on a mutualist partner for pollination (Klein et al. 2007). Microbial mutualists, in particular mycorrhizal fungi and nitrogen-fixing bacteria, are responsible for~ 75% of annual plant phosphorus uptake and a significant fraction of nitrogen uptake as well (van der Heijden et al. 2008). To better understand these interactions, we require an overarching theoretical framework. This is because empirical results are easily confounded by system-specific differences in interactions, timescale issues, and noise in ecological data.Developing theory for mutualisms is beset by several challenges. First, mutualisms are highly diverse in the currency of benefits they exchange. In plant–microbe mutualisms, the benefits exchanged are usually nutritional resources (carbon and phosphorus, or carbon and nitrogen)(Hacskaylo 1972, Oldroyd et al. 2011). In plant–pollinator mutualisms, however, pollinators obtain benefits in the form of nectar but plants obtain benefits in the form of pollinators facilitating increased movement of pollen (Pellmyr et al. 1996, Pellmyr 2003). The diversity of forms of benefits makes it challenging to develop a theory of mutualism population dynamics that can apply across different interaction types. Further, mutualisms are often temporally dynamic interactions in which the benefits exchanged between species are often mediated by trait evolution. For instance, plants sanction how much carbon they provide to rhizobia in different nodules based on the nitrogen benefits it receives from the bacteria (Denison 2000, West et al. 2002). Similarly, plants evolve to abort fruits which have been parasitized by the larvae of pollinators, preventing exploitation (Janzen 1979, James et al. 1994). In both cases, evolution plays a vital role in stabilizing mutualistic interaction dynamics and species population dynamics. Thus, integrating evolutionary