The Australian continent is known
for its profound concentration of deceptive organisms. Orchids are the favored
deception example in the plant kingdom, with sexual deception resulting in over
11 genera and hundreds of species; complementing Australia’s reputation as the
deception ‘hotspot’ of the world. An interesting
paper released late last year by Herberstein et al. (2013), suggests and discusses a few distinct reasons why
this might be so.
“Is the prevalence of some deceptive
systems a reflection of species diversity?”
This hypothesis questions whether
the diversification of deceptive species could be a function of overall species
diversity. If this were the case then the overall species diversity of plants
would be largely proportional to the diversity of the corresponding deceptive
species. Using orchids again as an example, only ~5% of worldwide species occur
in Australia, which is a very low species diversity and does not explain the high
number of deceptive species. Using orchids and other animal and plant examples,
Herberstein et al. (2013) concluded
that deceptive systems are not a reflection of species diversity.
“Does deception evolve readily in
Australia?”
This hypothesis investigates
Australia’s environmental conditions, and its isolation and potential for
invasion. Australia is mostly dry, with poor soils and frequent fires,
phenomena which have been used to explain the production of nutrient poor
biomass (can result in low rates of herbivory) along with ample amounts of sap
and nectar (which can lead to pollination by larger animals). These environmental
restrictions may have increased the selection for behavioral strategies that
minimise the costs to survive, e.g. floral rewardlessness in orchids, as well
as fragmentation of species due to fire regimes promoting selection for gene
flow across larger distances. If harsh environmental conditions are a driver
for the evolution of deception, that is where a high number of deceptive
systems are likely to occur. Due to limited information in the literature, Herberstein
et al. (2013) urge further research
into the frequency of deception in harsh environments to help support or
disprove this hypothesis.
Australia has been subject to a
long history of evolutionary isolation and recent invasions, which may explain
a radiation of deception. If this were the case, then it can be predicted that
most deceptive species have only recently arrived in Australia, and seek to
exploit naïve and endemic species. Australia’s Mediterranean and tropical
climates have given rise to high levels of endemism and biodiversity; which
provides a broad variety of potential deception targets. Isolated populations
are typically vulnerable to exploitation by invasive species, the mixing of
invasive species with existing species can lead to new symbiotic relationships;
and perhaps even deception relationships.
“Does Australia’s intellectual
and research culture encourage discovery of deception?”
Herberstein et al. (2013) discuss their final hypothesis of high levels of
Australian deceptive species as being the result of recent research popularity.
They predict that the popularity of certain research areas leads to a higher
than expected reporting of similar phenomena; including the discovery and
investigation of new deceptive species. For example, behavioral ecology in Australia
is thriving, especially when the number of research institutions are compared
with other nations. Over the years 2010 and 2011 8% of papers published in Behavioral Ecology were authored by
Australian researchers and institutions, compared with 16.5% of papers being from
the United Kingdom, which has 3 times the number of institutions as Australia.
However, Herberstein et al, (2013) issue
caution when presenting this hypothesis. This is because a more thorough investigation
and analysis on the number of publications on deceptive and non-deceptive
systems is needed for a comprehensive evaluation of the high number of
Australian deceptive species due to potential publication bias.
How interesting! I think that the idea of harsh environmental conditions leading to increased numbers of deceptive species fascinating. I wonder if this could be the case in other harsh environments? Do you think it could be possible that it is the native Australian fauna (the numbers and types of pollinators) that is driving deception? Really interesting.
ReplyDelete