D istr ibution Pa ttern s of Ga lls w ith D ifferen t F ig W a sps in Sycon ium of M onoec ious F icus racem osa

Transcription

1 2008, 21 (2) : Forest Research : (2008) , 2, 13, 1 (1., ; 2., ) :,, 3 : ( mm ), ( mm ) ( mm ) 3 : P latyneu ra testacea, P. m ayri A pocrypta. w estw oodi A pocrypta sp., P. agraensis, P. testacea : ; ; ; ; : S : A D istr ibution Pa ttern s of Ga lls w ith D ifferen t F ig W a sps in Sycon ium of M onoec ious F icus racem osa ZHA I Shu2wei 1, 2, YANG Da2rong 1, PENG Yan2qiong 1 (1. Xishuangbanna Trop ical Botanical Garden, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunm ing , Yunnan, China; 2. Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing , China) Abstract: F icus racem osa L inn. is monoecious, there exist several flower layers in figs at the stage of p re2post flora. According to the pedicel length, the galls are classified into three layers: galls p rojected into the cavity are nam ed as inner layer ( the length of pedicel is mm ), then intermediate layer ( the length of pedicel is mm), galls next to the fig wall belong to the outer layer ( the length of pedicel is mm ). The size of ovaries in the different layers are not the sam e, the ovaries in the inner layer are significantly bigger than those in intermediate and outer layer. The ovaries are also w ith the different sizes the wasp s. The ovaries contained P la tyneura testacea are the biggest, they are significantly larger than the others. The ovaries occup ied by P. m ayri are larger than those by P. ag raensis and pollinators, but there exist little difference between A pocrypta w estw ood i and A pocrypta sp.. The distribution of ovaries contained pollinators are almost in inner and interm ediate layers, but the non2pollinators are inclined to live in the outer layers. Specially, as gall2makers, P. testacea are different to other non2pollinators, they p refer live in the ovaries of inner layer, which is quite sim ilar to pollinators. Key words:monoecious; pollinator; non2pollinator; coexistence; F icus racem osa : : ( , ) : (1982 ),,,. :. 3.

2 146 21, [ 1-2 ] 750, [ 3-4 ], [ 5-6 ], [ 7 ], 1. 2, ( - ), , 3,,, 75% [ 8-13 ], Anstett [ 14 ] , 3 :, : ( mm ),, ( mm ), [ ], ( mm) 7 8, 30,, O lympus ( SZX ) [ 13, ] Jousellin [ 20 ],, ;,,, O lympus ( SZX ) [ 21 ] 1. 3 (1),,, : V = 4 /3 [ ( + ) 4 /3 ] (2) SPSS EXCEL, One2way ANOVA ( F icus racem osa L inn. ), (Moraceae) ( F icus) ( Subgen syco2 m orus),, m, ;,,,,,,, ; 3 4, Agaoninae Ceratosolen fusciceps Pollinator Sycoryctinae Apocrypta westwoodi Parasite Apocrypta sp. Parasite Sycophaginae P latyneura testacea Gall maker P latyneura m ayri P latyneura agraensis Gall maker Gall maker, Tam2 hane s T

3 2 : 147, ( 1), 45. 9%, 2 P. testacea, ;,, P. m ayri A. w estw oodi ; P. agraensis A pocrypta sp., 2 1 :,, One2way ANOVA ( 2) P. testacea, P. m ayri P. agraensis C. fusciceps, A. w estw ood i Apocrypta sp. C. fusciceps P. ag raensis 2 :,, One2way ANOVA ( 2) 3,, 5210%, ; /% C. fusciceps a b b P. agraensis 9. 2 a 6. 2 a 0. 8 b P. testacea 0. 2 a 0. 7 a 9. 8 b P. m ayri a 3. 3 b 0. 8 b A. westwoodi a 0. 8 b 0. 7 b Apocrypta sp a 0. 8 a 0. 0 b :,, One2way ANOVA , 3 :,, [ ], Kerdelhue [ 22 ] 3. 1,, Anstett [ 21 ],, [ 23 ], ;,,,,,,,

4 ;,,,, ( ),, [ 21 ],,, 3. 2 [ 27 ] 3 : ;, ;,, [ 24 ],,,,,,,,, 3 : P. testacea P. m ayri P. agraensis, A., w estw ood i A pocrypta sp. [ ] P. testa2, cea,,,, ; P. m ayri,,,,,,, P. testacea,,, 2,, P. agraensis, ( ),,, A. w estw oodi A pocrypta sp. ;,, 2,, 3. 3, P. testacea, Jousellin [ 20 ],,,, : [ 1 ] Herre E A. Laws governing species interactions? Encouragements and caution from figs and their associates[m ] / /Keller L. Levels of Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1999: [ 2 ] Herre E A, Knowlton N, Mueller U G, et al. The evolution of mutu2 alism s: exp loring the paths between conflict and cooperation [ J ]. Trends of Ecology Evolution, 1999, 14: [ 3 ] Berg C C. Classification and distribution of Ficus[ J ]. Experientia, 1989, 45:

5 2 : 149 [ 4 ] W eiblen G D. Phylogenetic relationship s of functionally dioecious Fi2 cus(m oraceae) based on ribosom al DNA sequences and m orphology [ J ]. Am erican Journal of B otany, 2000, 87: [ 5 ],,,. [ J ]., 2001, 22 (2) : [ 6 ] W eiblen G D. How to be a fig wasp [ J ]. Annual Review of Entomol2 ogy, 2002, 47: [ 7 ] Grover H, Chop ra R N. Observations on oviposition, nutrition and emergence of some fig insects[ J ]. Journal of Indian Botanical Socie2 ty, 1971, A50: [ 8 ] B ronstein J L. Mutualism, antagonism, and the fig2pollinator inter2 action[ J ]. Ecology, 1988, 69: [ 9 ] Jazen D H. How to be a fig[ J ]. Annual Review Ecology System, 1979, 10: [ 10 ] Kathuria P, Ganeshaiah K N, Shaanker R U, et al. Is there dimor2 phism for style lengths in monoecious figs [ J ]. Current Science, 1995, 68: [ 11 ] Kathuria P. The pollination biology of monoecious fig rrees in India [D ]. University of Leeds, 1999 [ 12 ] Verkerk W. Structure and function of the fig [ J ]. Experientia, 1989, 45: [ 13 ] W est S A, Herre E A. The ecology of the New World fig2parasiti2 zing wasp s Idarnes and implications for the evolution of the fig2polli2 nator mutualism [ J ]. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1994, B 258: [ 14 ] AnstettM C, B ronstein J L, Hossaert2McKey M. Resource alloca2 tion: a conflict in the fig/fig wasp mutualism [ J ]. Journal of Evolu2 tion B iology, 1996, 9: [ 15 ] Galil J, Eisikowitch D. Pollination ecology of Ficus sycom orus in East Africa[ J ]. Ecology, 1968, 49: [ 16 ] Ganeshaiah K N, Kathuria P, Shaanker R U, et al. Evolution of style2length wariability in figs and op tim ization of ovipositor length in their pollinator wasp s: a coevolution model[ J ]. Journal of Ge2 netics, 1995, 74: [ 17 ] Nefdt T J C, Comp ton S G. Regulation of seed and pollinator p ro2 duction in the fig2fig wasp mutualism [ J ]. Journal of Animal Ecolo2 gy, 1996, 65: [ 18 ] Johri B M, Konar R N. The floral morphology and embryology of Ficus religiosa L inn[ J ]. Phytomorphology, 1956, 6: [ 19 ] Galil J, Eisikowitch D. Studies on mutualistic symbiosis between syconia and sycophilous wasp s in monoecious figs[ J ]. New Phyto2 logical, 1971, 70: [ 20 ] Jousselin E, Hossaert2Mckey M, Vernet D, et al. Egg deposition patterns of fig pollinating wasp s: implications for studies on the sta2 bility of the mutualism [ J ]. Ecological Entomology, 2001, 26: [ 21 ] Anstett M C. Unbeatable strategy, constraint and coevolution, or how to resolve evolutionary conflicts: the case of the fig/wasp mutu2 alism [ J ]. O ikos, 2001, 95: [ 22 ] Kerdelhue C, Rasp lus J Y. The evolution of diocey among F icus (Morceae) : an alternate hypothesis involving non2pollinating fig wasp pressure on the fig2pollinator mutualism [ J ]. O ikos, 1996, 77: [ 23 ] Herre E A. Coevolution of rep roductive characteristics in 12 species of New World figs and their pollinator wasps [ J ]. Experientia, 1989, 45: [ 24 ] W eiblen G D, Yu D W, W est S A. Pollination and parasitism in functionally dioecious figs[ J ]. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 2001, B268: [ 25 ],,,. [ J ]., 2003, 22 (4) : [ 26 ],,,. [ J ]., 2003, 23 (8) : [ 27 ] Comp ton S G, Rasp lus J, W are A B. African fig wasp parasitoid communities[m ] / / Hawkins B A, Sheehan W. Parasitoid Commu2 nity Ecology. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1994: