Direct and Indirect Effects of Invasive vs. Native Ant-Hemipteran Mutualism: A Meta-Analysis That Supports the Mutualism Intensity Hypothesis

Abstract

Mutualism can facilitate the colonization, establishment, and spread of invasive species. By modifying interactions with third parties, mutualisms can have cascading community-wide effects. Both native and invasive ants are capable of forming mutualisms with hemipteran insects, preying on non-hemipteran herbivores and indirectly affecting primary production. Comparative research on the effects of both native and invasive ant exclusions on multitrophic interactions is therefore crucial for understanding the invasive potential of ants, along with any ecological consequences that invasions may have. We performed a quantitative review of the multitrophic effects of invasive and native ants on insect–plant food webs. Herbivorous insects are the most common food source for both invasive (comprising 56% of prey species caught) and native ants (55% of the prey species caught), followed by predators (31% for invasive ants, 45% for native ants). Excluding both invasive and native ants significantly reduced hemipteran abundance, and excluding invasive ants had a greater negative impact on hemipteran abundance than native ants. Native ant predation significantly reduced herbivore abundance, but excluding invasive ants had no effect. Cascading effects of native ants on plant fitness were significantly positive, but there was no significant impact of invasive ants. These findings suggest a weak relationship between the presence of invasive ants and non-hemipteran herbivore abundance. We suggest that the hemipteran–ant mutualism could represent a ‘symbiotic invasion’. The ecological dominance of invasive ants is often facilitated by hemipteran insects. This association requires invasive ant control strategies to expand beyond ants to consider mutualists.

Keywords

• invasive ant
• ant-hemipteran mutualism
• trophic cascade
• meta-analysis