Journal article
Goby–shrimp mutualism: Costs and benefits of obligate versus facultative strategies
- Abstract:
- We model the mutualism interactions between gobies and shrimp based on recent experimental work on the shrimp Alpheus floridans and the facultative and obligate gobies Ctenogobius saepepallens and Nes longus in the Bahamas. We show that the model is consistent with observations, and suggest that obligate mutualism may favour rapid speciation in gobies due to their restricted spatial range. We calculate the resilience of the goby-shrimp systems to evaluate the robustness of the mutualist interactions to parameter choices. While experimental evidence has noted the ubiquity of obligation in gobies, our theoretical investigation predicts the ubiquity of facultative mutualism in shrimp despite the many obligate mutualism strategies open to them. Future experimental work might be usefully directed at evaluating the ubiquity of facultative versus obligate interactions of shrimp in goby - shrimp mutualist populations, and examining whether facultative and obligate strategies are correlated with food availability.
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Access Document
- Files:
-
-
(Preview, Accepted manuscript, pdf, 1.0MB, Terms of use)
-
- Publisher copy:
- 10.1016/j.ecocom.2018.05.004
Authors
- Publisher:
- Elsevier
- Journal:
- Ecological Complexity More from this journal
- Volume:
- 36
- Pages:
- 22-29
- Publication date:
- 2018-07-05
- Acceptance date:
- 2018-05-19
- DOI:
- EISSN:
-
1476-9840
- ISSN:
-
1476-945X
- Language:
-
English
- Keywords:
- Pubs id:
-
pubs:891110
- UUID:
-
uuid:6b9a7918-dfa1-474e-a4ca-b026a84f34c0
- Local pid:
-
pubs:891110
- Source identifiers:
-
891110
- Deposit date:
-
2019-04-05
- ARK identifier:
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- Crown Copyright
- Copyright date:
- 2018
- Notes:
- Crown Copyright © 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V. This is the accepted manuscript version of the article. The final version is available online from Elsevier at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2018.05.004
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record