1
|
Kikuchi DW, Allen WL, Arbuckle K, Aubier TG, Briolat ES, Burdfield-Steel ER, Cheney KL, Daňková K, Elias M, Hämäläinen L, Herberstein ME, Hossie TJ, Joron M, Kunte K, Leavell BC, Lindstedt C, Lorioux-Chevalier U, McClure M, McLellan CF, Medina I, Nawge V, Páez E, Pal A, Pekár S, Penacchio O, Raška J, Reader T, Rojas B, Rönkä KH, Rößler DC, Rowe C, Rowland HM, Roy A, Schaal KA, Sherratt TN, Skelhorn J, Smart HR, Stankowich T, Stefan AM, Summers K, Taylor CH, Thorogood R, Umbers K, Winters AE, Yeager J, Exnerová A. The evolution and ecology of multiple antipredator defences. J Evol Biol 2023; 36:975-991. [PMID: 37363877 DOI: 10.1111/jeb.14192] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2022] [Revised: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 05/07/2023] [Indexed: 06/28/2023]
Abstract
Prey seldom rely on a single type of antipredator defence, often using multiple defences to avoid predation. In many cases, selection in different contexts may favour the evolution of multiple defences in a prey. However, a prey may use multiple defences to protect itself during a single predator encounter. Such "defence portfolios" that defend prey against a single instance of predation are distributed across and within successive stages of the predation sequence (encounter, detection, identification, approach (attack), subjugation and consumption). We contend that at present, our understanding of defence portfolio evolution is incomplete, and seen from the fragmentary perspective of specific sensory systems (e.g., visual) or specific types of defences (especially aposematism). In this review, we aim to build a comprehensive framework for conceptualizing the evolution of multiple prey defences, beginning with hypotheses for the evolution of multiple defences in general, and defence portfolios in particular. We then examine idealized models of resource trade-offs and functional interactions between traits, along with evidence supporting them. We find that defence portfolios are constrained by resource allocation to other aspects of life history, as well as functional incompatibilities between different defences. We also find that selection is likely to favour combinations of defences that have synergistic effects on predator behaviour and prey survival. Next, we examine specific aspects of prey ecology, genetics and development, and predator cognition that modify the predictions of current hypotheses or introduce competing hypotheses. We outline schema for gathering data on the distribution of prey defences across species and geography, determining how multiple defences are produced, and testing the proximate mechanisms by which multiple prey defences impact predator behaviour. Adopting these approaches will strengthen our understanding of multiple defensive strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David W Kikuchi
- Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
- Evolutionary Biology, Universität Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany
| | | | - Kevin Arbuckle
- Department of Biosciences, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
| | - Thomas G Aubier
- Department of Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
- Laboratoire Évolution & Diversité Biologique, Université Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, UMR 5174, CNRS/IRD, Toulouse, France
| | | | - Emily R Burdfield-Steel
- Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karen L Cheney
- School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia
| | - Klára Daňková
- Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Marianne Elias
- Institut de Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité, CNRS, MNHN, Sorbonne Université, EPHE, Université des Antilles, Paris, France
- Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Gamboa, Panama
| | - Liisa Hämäläinen
- School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Marie E Herberstein
- School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Thomas J Hossie
- Department of Biology, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mathieu Joron
- CEFE, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, EPHE, IRD, Montpellier, France
| | - Krushnamegh Kunte
- National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bengaluru, India
| | - Brian C Leavell
- Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA
| | - Carita Lindstedt
- Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Ugo Lorioux-Chevalier
- Laboratoire Écologie, Évolution, Interactions des Systèmes Amazoniens (LEEISA), Université de Guyane, CNRS, IFREMER, Cayenne, France
| | - Melanie McClure
- Laboratoire Écologie, Évolution, Interactions des Systèmes Amazoniens (LEEISA), Université de Guyane, CNRS, IFREMER, Cayenne, France
| | | | - Iliana Medina
- School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Viraj Nawge
- National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bengaluru, India
| | - Erika Páez
- Institut de Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité, CNRS, MNHN, Sorbonne Université, EPHE, Université des Antilles, Paris, France
| | - Arka Pal
- National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bengaluru, India
| | - Stano Pekár
- Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
| | - Olivier Penacchio
- School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK
- Computer Vision Center, Computer Science Department, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jan Raška
- Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Tom Reader
- School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Bibiana Rojas
- Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, Konrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Biology and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland
| | - Katja H Rönkä
- HiLIFE Helsinki Institute of Life Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Research Programme in Organismal & Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Daniela C Rößler
- Zukunftskolleg, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
- Department of Collective Behavior, Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Konstanz, Germany
| | - Candy Rowe
- Institute of Biosciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Hannah M Rowland
- Max Planck Research Group Predators and Toxic Prey, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Jena, Germany
| | - Arlety Roy
- Laboratoire Écologie, Évolution, Interactions des Systèmes Amazoniens (LEEISA), Université de Guyane, CNRS, IFREMER, Cayenne, France
| | - Kaitlin A Schaal
- Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - John Skelhorn
- Institute of Biosciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Hannah R Smart
- Hawkesbury Institute of the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Ted Stankowich
- Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Long Beach, California, USA
| | - Amanda M Stefan
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kyle Summers
- Department of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA
| | | | - Rose Thorogood
- HiLIFE Helsinki Institute of Life Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Research Programme in Organismal & Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Kate Umbers
- Hawkesbury Institute of the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Science Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Anne E Winters
- Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK
| | - Justin Yeager
- Grupo de Biodiversidad Medio Ambiente y Salud, Universidad de Las Américas, Quito, Ecuador
| | - Alice Exnerová
- Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Havlikova M, Bosakova T, Petschenka G, Cabala R, Exnerova A, Bosakova Z. Analysis of defensive secretion of a milkweed bug Lygaeus equestris by 1D GC-MS and GC×GC-MS: sex differences and host-plant effect. Sci Rep 2020; 10:3092. [PMID: 32080314 PMCID: PMC7033152 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-60056-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2019] [Accepted: 02/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
The composition of defensive secretion produced by metathoracic scent glands was analysed in males and females of the milkweed bug Lygaeus equestris (Heteroptera) using gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection (GC-MS). The bugs were raised either on cardenolide-containing Adonis vernalis or on control sunflower seeds in order to determine whether the possibility to sequester cardenolides from their host plants would affect the composition of defensive scent-gland secretion. Profiles of the composition of defensive secretions of males and females raised on sunflower were closely similar, with predominant presence of (E)-2-octenal, (E)-2-octen-1-ol, decanal and 3-octen-1-ol acetate. The secretion of bugs raised on A. vernalis was more sexually dimorphic, and some chemicals e.g. (E,E)-2,4-hexadienyl acetate and 2-phenylethyl acetate were dominant in males, but absent in females. Compared to bugs from sunflower, the scent-gland secretion of bugs raised on A. vernalis was characterized by lower overall intensity of the peaks obtained for detected chemicals and by absence of some chemicals that have supposedly antipredatory function ((E)-2-hexenal, (E)-4-oxo-hex-2-enal, 2,4-octadienal). The results suggest that there might be a trade-off between the sequestration of defensive chemicals from host plants and their synthesis in metathoracic scent-glands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Havlikova
- Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Tereza Bosakova
- Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Georg Petschenka
- Department of Insect Biotechnology, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - Radomir Cabala
- Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.,Toxicology Department, Institute of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Alice Exnerova
- Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
| | - Zuzana Bosakova
- Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
| |
Collapse
|