A Molecular Phylogeny and the Evolution of Nest Architecture and Behavior in Trigona S.S
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Apidologie 39 (2008) Available online at: c INRA/DIB-AGIB/ EDP Sciences, 2008 www.apidologie.org DOI: 10.1051/apido:2007051 Original article A molecular phylogeny and the evolution of nest architecture and behavior in Trigona s.s. (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Meliponini)* Claus Rasmussena,JoãoM.F.Camargob a Department of Entomology, University of Illinois, 320 Morrill Hall, 505 S. Goodwin Ave. Urbana, IL 61801, USA b Departamento de Biologia, Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Bandeirantes, 3900, 14040-901 Ribeirão Preto-SP, Brazil Received 29 June 2007 – Revised 28 October 2007 – Accepted 1 November 2007 Abstract – Stingless bees exhibit extraordinary variation in nest architecture within and among species. To test for phylogenetic association of behavioral traits for species of the Neotropical stingless bee genus Trigona s.s., a phylogenetic hypothesis was generated by combining sequence data of 24 taxa from one mitochondrial (16S rRNA) and four nuclear gene fragments (long-wavelength rhodopsin copy 1 (opsin), elongation factor-1α copy F2, arginine kinase, and 28S rRNA). Fifteen characteristics of the nest architec- ture were coded and tested for phylogenetic association. Several characters have significant phylogenetic signal, including type of nesting substrate, nest construction material, and hemipterophily, the tending of hemipteroid insects in exchange for sugar excretions. Phylogenetic independent habits encountered in Trig- ona s.s. include coprophily and necrophagy. molecular phylogeny / neotropical / stingless bee / behavior / nest 1. INTRODUCTION largest and most diverse group of social bees worldwide, the external nest entrance and in- Among the social bees there exists a bewil- ternal nest features often exhibit details that dering array of nest architecture and nesting allow for species-specific recognition (e.g., behavior, from the simple underground tun- Michener, 1959; Sakagami, 1982; Camargo nels of halictid bees to the elaborate structures and Pedro, 2003b; Franck et al., 2004). Re- and forms of stingless bees (Michener, 2000). cent reviews of the diverse biological features Nest characteristics such as the nesting site, ar- of stingless bees include their multi-faceted chitectural complexity, and building materials recruitment communication (Nieh, 2004) and may be taxon specific and provide an excellent the architectural diversity and complexity of opportunity to assess information about un- their nests (Roubik, 2006), while new molec- derlying behavioral evolution of the respective ular phylogenies have elucidated generic rela- taxa and higher groups (Michener, 1961, 1964; tionships (Costa et al., 2003; Rasmussen and Kerr et al., 1967; Wille and Michener, 1973; Cameron, 2007; Rasmussen, unpubl. data). Wenzel, 1991). Within the stingless bees, the These investigations provide a new foundation for the study of behavioral evolution in a com- Corresponding author: C. Rasmussen, parative framework. [email protected] * Manuscript editor: Eduardo A.B. Almeida Previous comparative studies of stingless Online material is available at: bee nesting biology (summarized in Wille http://www.apidologie.org and Michener, 1973; Roubik, 2006) provide Article published by EDP Sciences and available at http://www.apidologie.org or http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/apido:2007051 2 C. Rasmussen, J.M.F. Camargo important descriptive accounts. Phylogenetic New World genera was not examined. Trigona hypothesis-based studies combining character s.s. occurs from Mexico (Nayarit and Sinaloa; data from morphology and nest architecture Trigona fulviventris) to Argentina (Misiones; have been proposed for two Neotropical gen- Trigona spinipes) and encompasses 32 nomi- era Partamona and Trichotrigona (Camargo nal species and approximately 28 undescribed and Pedro, 2003a, b). However, the use of species (Camargo, unpubl. data). Most of the nest characters in the reconstruction of phy- species were treated in the seminal taxonomic logenies of stingless bees is difficult because (and biological) revision of Schwarz (1948), of apparent homoplasy, with frequent rever- with recent nomenclatorial changes summa- sals and independent gains of traits, such as rized by Camargo and Pedro (2007). The the construction of combs in clusters (Wille species of Trigona s.s. can be placed into and Michener, 1973). Rasmussen (2004) and nine species groups (Tab. I) as recognized by Roubik (2006) further noted intraspecific plas- Camargo (unpubl. data), based on their mor- ticity in the choice of the nest substrate (i.e., phological and biological characteristics. physical placement of the nest), suggesting Our goals in this paper are to describe the that species may behave opportunistically and likely evolutionary history and potential phy- employ a range of nest designs. logenetic association of some of the diverse In general terms, nests of stingless bees nest characteristics of an array of species of are established in cavities where the bees Trigona s.s. We describe and code 15 nest may build solid “batumen plates” to shield characters, and map these onto a new molec- and protect the colony. Nests are then con- ular phylogeny reported here. We interpret structed using wax in a mixture with resins, those characters that are phylogenetically as- mud, feces, or other materials collected by the sociated as evolutionarily conserved and those bees. The nest entrance provides access into that lack such association as evolutionarily la- the nest where the brood is located. “Involu- bile. crum sheaths” made of cerumen (a mixture of wax with resins) may be built as a protec- tive layer or sheath around the brood cham- 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS ber (“brood involucrum”) or around the whole colony (“external involucrum”), including the 2.1. Taxon sampling and DNA storage vessels for honey and pollen. Brood sequencing cells can be clustered or they may be arranged in combs that are usually positioned in a hor- Twenty-four taxa were included from all but izontal plane. Outside the brood involucrum, the Trigona dimidiata species group (Tab. II). Out- small pots with food provisions are built in groups were represented by five New World taxa clusters. All of these nest characteristics (sub- from Rasmussen and Cameron (2007). Voucher strate, composition, and texture of the different specimens used in the molecular analysis are de- parts of the nest), are variable across the stin- posited in the Illinois Natural History Survey gless bees. Detailed descriptions of stingless (Champaign, USA). We did not sample exhaus- bee nests with introductions to the terminology tively to include additional undescribed species and diversity are available in several reviews within each species group (Tab. I), although T. (Schwarz, 1948; Michener, 1961; Wille and recursa and T. fuscipennis were represented by Michener, 1973; Sakagami, 1982; Wille, 1983; multiple specimens in our analysis, as morphol- ogy suggests these represent distinct biological Camargo and Pedro, 2003b; Roubik, 2006). species. DNA sequences from gene fragments used . The stingless bee genus Trigona s l has tra- in Rasmussen and Cameron (2007) (mitochondrial ditionally included subgenera from both the 16S rRNA, nuclear long-wavelength rhodopsin Old and the New World (Michener, 2000). copy 1 (opsin), elongation factor-1α copy F2 (EF- Recently, Costa et al. (2003) and Rasmussen 1α), and arginine kinase (ArgK)) were obtained and Cameron (2007) circumscribed Trigona for inferring interspecific and intergeneric rela- as a strictly New World genus, although its tionships. To strengthen support for relationships phylogenetic position among the remaining among the outgroups and their relationship to the Evolution of nest architecture in Trigona 3 Table I. Nine recognized species groups of Trigona s.s. based on morphological and biological characteris- tics and their distribution. The distribution patterns are indicated according to the biogeographical areas or main Neotropical components that they occupy, as proposed by Camargo and Pedro (2003a: 371, Fig. 56a): “Atl” (Southeastern Brazil), “SEAm” (south of the rivers Madeira and Amazon to the northwest of Ar- gentina and north of São Paulo, Brazil), “NAm” (craton of the northern Brazil, Guianas, Venezuela, and west of Colombia), “SWAm” (southwestern Amazon region, limited to the north by the rivers Negro and Uaupés, to the southeast, and east by the rivers Madeira/Mamoré, and to the west by the Andean mountain range), “Chocó-CA” (southwestern Ecuador north to the lowlands of Mexico). The distribution patterns correspond to: (A) wide distribution in Neotropical region: Atl, SEAm, NAm, SWAm, Chocó-CA; (B) re- stricted to the components NAm, SWAm, SEAm, with one or two species in central part of Chocó-CA (north of Colombia, Panama, and Costa Rica) and none in Atl; (C) restricted to the components NAm, SWAm, and northern part of SEAm. Species group Included nominal and undescribed taxa of Distribution pattern Trigona s.s. in each species group “amalthea” T. amalthea (Olivier, 1789); T. silvestriana (Vachal, A 1908); T. truculenta Almeida, 1984 “fulviventris” T. fulviventris Guérin, 1835; T. braueri Friese, 1900; A T. guianae Cockerell, 1910; ca. 6 undescribed species “fuscipennis” T. fuscipennis Friese, 1900; T. albipennis Almeida, A 1995; ca. 8 undescribed species “spinipes” T. spinipes (Fabricius, 1793); T. hyalinata A (Lepeletier, 1836); T. nigerrima Cresson, 1878; T. dallatorreana Friese, 1900; T. pampana Strand, 1910; T. branneri Cockerell,