The chemical basis of host nest detection and chemical integration in a cuckoo paper wasp

Paper wasps larval formations from the perspective of physics

From a physics perspective, paper wasps arrange larval systems in specific formations to attain mechanical stability for the nest. The closer the distance between the center of mass of the larval system (CML) and the center of mass of the nest (CMN), the lower the moment of force generated by the larval system, resulting in a more stable nest.

Differential investment in visual and olfactory brain regions is linked to the sensory needs of a wasp social parasite and its host

Obligate insect social parasites evolve traits to effectively locate and then exploit their hosts, whereas hosts have complex social behavioral repertoires, which include sensory recognition to reject potential conspecific intruders and heterospecific parasites. While social parasites and host behaviors have been studied extensively, less is known about how their sensory systems function to meet their specific selective pressures. Here, we compare investment in visual and olfactory brain regions in the paper wasp Polistes dominula, and its obligate social parasite P. sulcifer, to explore the links among sensory systems,brain and behavior. Our results show significant relative volumetric differences between these two closely related species, consistent with their very different life histories. Social parasites show proportionally larger optic lobes and central complex to likely navigate long-distance migrations and unfamiliar landscapes to locate the specific species of hosts they usurp. Contrastingly, hosts have larger antennal lobes and calyces of the mushroom bodies compared with social parasites, as predicted by their sensory means to maintain social cohesion via olfactory signals, allocate colony tasks, forage, and recognize conspecific and heterospecific intruders. Our work suggests how this tradeoff between visual and olfactory brain regions may facilitate different sensory adaptations needed to perform social and foraging tasks by the host, including recognition of parasites, or to fly long distances and successful host localizing by the social parasite.

Cuticular Hydrocarbon Profile of Parasitic Beetles, Aethina tumida (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae)

Simple Summary

Social insects use cuticular hydrocarbons for chemical recognition and communication. Cuticular hydrocarbons can also be exploited by parasites to their advantage for undermining host recognition systems. The small hive beetle (SHB) is a parasite of honey bee colonies but can also infest nests of other bee species. However, its chemical profile is still not known. For the first time, the present study investigated the SHB chemical profile and compared it with that of its honey bee host. The results show that the SHB has a low chemical profile that is similar to its honey bee host’s. However, while honey bees had a clear colony-specific chemical profile, SHBs did not. The generic chemical profile of the SHB is most likely linked to its free-flying behaviour in the field as these parasites are known to switch between host colonies, possibly limiting the acquisition of a colony specific chemical profile. Our findings also suggest that SHBs do not exploit any finely tuned chemical strategy to conceal their presence inside host colonies and probably rely on behavioural adaptations.

Abstract

Cuticular hydrocarbons (CHCs) cover insects’ bodies and play important roles in chemical communication, including nestmate recognition, for social insects. To enter colonies of a social host species, parasites may acquire host-specific CHCs or covertly maintain their own CHC profile by lowering its quantity. However, the chemical profile of small hive beetles (SHBs), Aethina tumida, which are parasites of honey bee, Apis mellifera, colonies, and other bee nests, is currently unknown. Here, adults of SHB and honey bee host workers were collected from the same field colonies and their CHC profiles were analysed using GC-MS. The chemical profiles of field-sampled SHBs were also compared with those of host-naive beetles reared in the laboratory. Laboratory-reared SHBs differed in their CHC profiles from field-sampled ones, which showed a more similar, but ten-fold lower, generic host CHC profile compared to host workers. While the data confirm colony-specific CHCs of honey bee workers, the profile of field-collected SHBs was not colony-specific. Adult SHBs often commute between different host colonies, thereby possibly preventing the acquisition of a colony-specific CHC profiles. An ester was exclusive to both groups of SHBs and might constitute an intraspecific recognition cue. Our data suggest that SHBs do not use any finely tuned chemical strategy to conceal their presence inside host colonies and instead probably rely on their hard exoskeleton and defence behaviours.

Low Host Specialization in the Cuckoo Wasp, Parnopes grandior, Weakens Chemical Mimicry but Does Not Lead to Local Adaption

Insect brood parasites have evolved a variety of strategies to avoid being detected by their hosts. Few previous studies on cuckoo wasps (Hymenoptera: Chrysididae), which are natural enemies of solitary wasps and bees, have shown that chemical mimicry, i.e., the biosynthesis of cuticular hydrocarbons (CHC) that match the host profile, evolved in several species. However, mimicry was not detected in all investigated host-parasite pairs. The effect of host range as a second factor that may play a role in evolution of mimicry has been neglected, since all previous studies were carried out on host specialists and at nesting sites where only one host species occurred. Here we studied the cuckoo wasp Parnopes grandior, which attacks many digger wasp species of the genus Bembix (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae). Given its weak host specialization, P. grandior may either locally adapt by increasing mimicry precision to only one of the sympatric hosts or it may evolve chemical insignificance by reducing the CHC profile complexity and/or CHCs amounts. At a study site harbouring three host species, we found evidence for a weak but appreciable chemical deception strategy in P. grandior. Indeed, the CHC profile of P. grandior was more similar to all sympatric Bembix species than to a non-host wasp species belonging to the same tribe as Bembix. Furthermore, P. grandior CHC profile was equally distant to all the hosts’ CHC profiles, thus not pointing towards local adaptation of the CHC profile to one of the hosts’ profile. We conducted behavioural assays suggesting that such weak mimicry is sufficient to reduce host aggression, even in absence of an insignificance strategy, which was not detected. Hence, we finally concluded that host range may indeed play a role in shaping the level of chemical mimicry in cuckoo wasps.

Inquiline social parasites as tools to unlock the secrets of insect sociality

Insect societies play a crucial role in the functioning of most ecosystems and have fascinated both scientists and the lay public for centuries. Despite the long history of study, we are still far from understanding how insect societies have evolved and how social cohesion in their colonies is maintained. Here we suggest inquiline social parasites of insect societies as an under-exploited experimental tool for understanding sociality. We draw on examples from obligate inquiline (permanent) social parasites in wasps, ants and bees to illustrate how these parasites may allow us to better understand societies and learn more about the evolution and functioning of insect societies. We highlight three main features of these social parasite-host systems-namely, close phylogenetic relationships, strong selective pressures arising from coevolution and multiple independent origins-that make inquiline social parasites particularly suited for this aim; we propose a conceptual comparative framework that considers trait losses, gains and modifications in social parasite-host systems. We give examples of how this framework can reveal the more elusive secrets of sociality by focusing on two cornerstones of sociality: communication and reproductive division of labour. Together with social parasites in other taxonomic groups, such as cuckoos in birds, social parasitism has a great potential to reveal the mechanisms and evolution of complex social groups. This article is part of the theme issue 'The coevolutionary biology of brood parasitism: from mechanism to pattern'.

Reproductive Dominance Strategies in Insect Social Parasites

In eusocial insects, the high cost of altruistic cooperation between colony members has favoured the evolution of cheaters that exploit social services of other species. In the most extreme forms of insect social parasitism, which has evolved multiple times across most social lineages, obligately parasitic species invade the nests of social species and manipulate the workforce of their hosts to rear their own reproductive offspring. As alien species that have lost their own sociality, these social parasites still face social challenges to infiltrate and control their hosts, thus providing independent replicates for understanding the mechanisms essential to social dominance. This review compares socially parasitic insect lineages to find general trends and build a hypothetical framework for the means by which social parasites achieve reproductive dominance. It highlights how host social organization and social parasite life history traits may impact the way they achieve reproductive supremacy, including the potential role of chemical cues. The review discusses the coevolutionary dynamics between host and parasite during this process. Altogether, this review emphasizes the value of social parasites for understanding social evolution and the need for future research in this area.

Social parasitism and the molecular basis of phenotypic evolution

Contrasting phenotypes arise from similar genomes through a combination of losses, gains, co-option and modifications of inherited genomic material. Understanding the molecular basis of this phenotypic diversity is a fundamental challenge in modern evolutionary biology. Comparisons of the genes and their expression patterns underlying traits in closely related species offer an unrivaled opportunity to evaluate the extent to which genomic material is reorganized to produce novel traits. Advances in molecular methods now allow us to dissect the molecular machinery underlying phenotypic diversity in almost any organism, from single-celled entities to the most complex vertebrates. Here we discuss how comparisons of social parasites and their free-living hosts may provide unique insights into the molecular basis of phenotypic evolution. Social parasites evolve from a eusocial ancestor and are specialized to exploit the socially acquired resources of their closely-related eusocial host. Molecular comparisons of such species pairs can reveal how genomic material is re-organized in the loss of ancestral traits (i.e., of free-living traits in the parasites) and the gain of new ones (i.e., specialist traits required for a parasitic lifestyle). We define hypotheses on the molecular basis of phenotypes in the evolution of social parasitism and discuss their wider application in our understanding of the molecular basis of phenotypic diversity within the theoretical framework of phenotypic plasticity and shifting reaction norms. Currently there are no data available to test these hypotheses, and so we also provide some proof of concept data using the paper wasp social parasite/host system (Polistes sulcifer-Polistes dominula). This conceptual framework and first empirical data provide a spring-board for directing future genomic analyses on exploiting social parasites as a route to understanding the evolution of phenotypic specialization.

Evidence for passive chemical camouflage in the parasitic mite Varroa destructor

Social insect colonies provide a stable and safe environment for their members. Despite colonies being heavily guarded, parasites have evolved numerous strategies to invade and inhabit these hostile places. Two such strategies are (true) chemical mimicry via biosynthesis of host odor, and chemical camouflage, in which compounds are acquired from the host. The ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor feeds on hemolymph of its honey bee host, Apis mellifera. The mite's odor closely resembles that of its host, which allows V. destructor to remain undetected as it lives on the adult host during its phoretic phase and while reproducing on the honeybee brood. During the mite life cycle, it switches between host adults and brood, which requires it to adjust its profile to mimic the very different odors of honey bee brood and adults. In a series of transfer experiments, using bee adults and pupae, we tested whether V. destructor changes its profile by synthesizing compounds or by using chemical camouflage. We show that V. destructor required direct access to host cuticle to mimic its odor, and that it was unable to synthesize host-specific compounds itself. The mite was able to mimic host odor, even when dead, indicating a passive physico-chemical mechanism of the parasite cuticle. The chemical profile of V. destructor was adjusted within 3 to 9 h after switching hosts, demonstrating that passive camouflage is a highly efficient, fast and flexible way for the mite to adapt to a new host profile when moving between different host life stages or colonies.

Facial markings in the social cuckoo wasp Polistes sulcifer: No support for the visual deception and the assessment hypotheses

Insect social parasites have to conquer a host colony by overcoming its defensive barriers. In addition to increased fighting abilities, many social parasites evolved sophisticated sensory deception mechanisms to elude host colonies defenses by exploiting host communication channels. Recently, it has been shown that the conspicuous facial markings of a paper wasp social parasite, Polistes sulcifer, decrease the aggressiveness of host foundresses. Two main hypotheses stand as explanations of this phenomenon: visual sensory deception (i.e. the black patterning reduces host aggression by exploiting the host visual communication system) and visual quality assessment (i.e. facial markings reduce aggressiveness as they signal the increased fighting ability of parasites). Through behavioral assays and morphological measurements we tested three predictions resulting from these hypotheses and found no support either for the visual sensory deception or for the quality assessment to explain the reduction in host aggressiveness towards the parasite. Our results suggest that other discrimination processes may explain the observed phenomenon.

Cleptoparasites, social parasites and a common host: chemical insignificance for visiting host nests, chemical mimicry for living in

Social insect colonies contain attractive resources for many organisms. Cleptoparasites sneak into their nests and steal food resources. Social parasites sneak into their social organisations and exploit them for reproduction. Both cleptoparasites and social parasites overcome the ability of social insects to detect intruders, which is mainly based on chemoreception. Here we compared the chemical strategies of social parasites and cleptoparasites that target the same host and analyse the implication of the results for the understanding of nestmate recognition mechanisms. The social parasitic wasp Polistes atrimandibularis (Hymenoptera: Vespidae), and the cleptoparasitic velvet ant Mutilla europaea (Hymenoptera: Mutillidae), both target the colonies of the paper wasp Polistes biglumis (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). There is no chemical mimicry with hosts in the cuticular chemical profiles of velvet ants and pre-invasion social parasites, but both have lower concentrations of recognition cues (chemical insignificance) and lower proportions of branched alkanes than their hosts. Additionally, they both have larger proportions of alkenes than their hosts. In contrast, post-invasion obligate social parasites have proportions of branched hydrocarbons as large as those of their hosts and their overall cuticular profiles resemble those of their hosts. These results suggest that the chemical strategies for evading host detection vary according to the lifestyles of the parasites. Cleptoparasites and pre-invasion social parasites that sneak into host colonies limit host overaggression by having few recognition cues, whereas post-invasion social parasites that sneak into their host social structure facilitate social integration by chemical mimicry with colony members.