Agrawal, A. A. and Spiller, D. A. (2004). Polymorphic buttonwood: effects of disturbance on resistance to herbivores in green and silver morphs of a Bahamian shrub. American Journal of Botany, 91, 1990–1997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ballaré, C. L., Mazza, C. A., Austin, A. T. and Pierik, R. (2012). Canopy light and plant health. Plant Physiology, 160, 145–155.Google Scholar

Ballhorn, D. J., Godschalx, A. L., Smart, S. M., Kautz, S. and Schädler, M. (2014). Chemical defense lowers plant competitiveness. Oecologia, 176, 811–824.Google Scholar

Barton, A. M. (1986). Spatial variation in the effect of ants on extrafloral nectary plant. Ecology, 67, 495–504.Google Scholar

Beattie, A. J. (1985). The Evolutionary Ecology of Ant-Plant Mutualisms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Belkhadi, A., Hediji, H., Abbes, Z. et al. (2010). Effects of exogenous salicylic acid pre-treatment on cadmium toxicity and leaf lipid content in Linum usitatissimum L. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 73, 1004–1011.Google Scholar

Bentley, B. L. (1977). Extrafloral nectaries and protection by pugnacious bodyguards. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 8, 407–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bixenmann, R. J., Coley, P. D. and Kursar, T. A. (2011). Is extrafloral nectar production induced by herbivores or ants in a tropical facultative ant-plant mutualism? Oecologia, 165, 417–425.Google Scholar

Bryant, J. P., Chapin III, F. S. and Klein, D. R. (1983). Carbon/nutrient balance of boreal plants in relation to vertebrate herbivory. Oikos, 40, 357–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bryant, J. P., Chapin III, F. S., Reichardt, P. B. and Clausen, T. P. (1987). Response of winter chemical defense in Alaska paper birch and green alder to manipulation of plant carbon/nutrient balance. Oecologia, 72, 510–514.Google Scholar

Chamberlain, S. A. and Holland, J. N. (2009). Quantitative synthesis of context dependency in ant-plant protection mutualisms. Ecology, 90, 2384–2392.Google Scholar

Chen, X., Adams, B., Bergeron, C., Sabo, A. and Hooper-Bùi, L. (2014). Ant community structure and response to disturbances on coastal dunes of Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Insect Conservation, 19, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Choh, Y., Kugimiya, S. and Takabayashi, J. (2006). Induced production of extrafloral nectar in intact lima bean plants in response to volatiles from spider mite-infested conspecific plants as a possible indirect defense against spider mites. Oecologia, 147, 455–460.Google Scholar

Cogni, R., Freitas, A. V. and Oliveira, P. S. (2003). Interhabitat differences in ant activity on plant foliage: ants at extrafloral nectaries of Hibiscus pernambucensis in sandy and mangrove forests. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 107, 125–131.Google Scholar

Coley, P. D., Bryant, J. P. and Chapin, F. S. (1985). Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science, 230, 895–899.Google Scholar

Dalling, J. W. and Hubbell, S. P. (2002). Seed size, growth rate and gap microsite conditions as determinants of recruitment success for pioneer species. Journal of Ecology, 90, 557–568.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. W. and Fisher, B. L. (1991). Symbiosis of ants with Cecropia as a function of light regime. In Ant-Plant Interactions, Huxley, C. R. and Cutler, D. F. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 289–309.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. W. and McKey, D. (1993). Ant-plant symbioses: stalking the chuyachaqui. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 8, 326–332.Google Scholar

de la Fuente, M. A. S. and Marquis, R. J. (1999). The role of ant-tended extrafloral nectaries in the protection and benefit of a Neotropical rainforest tree. Oecologia, 118, 192–202.Google Scholar

De Sibio, P. R. and Rossi, M. N. (2016). Interaction effect between herbivory and plant fertilization on extrafloral nectar production and on seed traits: An experimental study with Ricinus communis (Euphorbiaceae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 109, 1612–1618.Google Scholar

Dyer, L. A., Dodson, C. D., Beihoffer, J. and Letourneau, D. K. (2001). Trade-offs in antiherbivore defenses in Piper cenocladum: ant mutualists versus plant secondary metabolites. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 27, 581–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Eck, G., Fiala, B., Linsenmair, K. E., Hashim, R. B. and Proksch, P. (2001). Trade-off between chemical and biotic antiherbivore defense in the South East Asian plant genus Macaranga. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 27, 1979–1996.Google Scholar

Ellsworth, D. S. and Reich, P. B. (1992). Water relations and gas exchange of Acer saccharum seedlings in contrasting natural light and water regimes. Tree Physiology, 10, 1–20.Google Scholar

Falcão, J. C. F., Dáttilo, W. and Izzo, T. J. (2014). Temporal variation in extrafloral nectar secretion in different ontogenic stages of the fruits of Alibertia verrucosa S. Moore (Rubiaceae) in a Neotropical savanna. Journal of Plant Interactions, 9, 137–142.Google Scholar

Fischer, R. C., Richter, A., Wanek, W. and Mayer, V. (2002). Plants feed ants: food bodies of myrmecophytic Piper and their significance for the interaction with Pheidole bicornis ants. Oecologia, 133, 186–192.Google Scholar

Folgarait, P. J. and Davidson, D. W. (1994). Antiherbivore defenses of myrmecophytic Cecropia under different light regimes. Oikos, 71, 305–320.Google Scholar

Folgarait, P. J. and Davidson, D. W. (1995). Myrmecophytic Cecropia: antiherbivore defenses under different nutrient treatments. Oecologia, 104, 189–206.Google Scholar

Fournier, A. R., Gosselin, A., Proctor, J. T. et al. (2004). Relationship between understory light and growth of forest-grown American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.). Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 129, 425–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frederickson, M. E., Ravenscraft, A., Arcila Hernández, L. M. et al. (2013). What happens when ants fail at plant defence? Cordia nodosa dynamically adjusts its investment in both direct and indirect resistance traits in response to herbivore damage. Journal of Ecology, 101, 400–409.Google Scholar

Frederickson, M. E., Ravenscraft, A., Miller, G. A. et al. (2012). The direct and ecological costs of an ant-plant symbiosis. The American Naturalist, 179, 768–778.Google Scholar

García, L. V., Maltez-Mouro, S., Pérez-Ramos, I. M., Freitas, H. and Marañón, T. (2006). Counteracting gradients of light and soil nutrients in the understorey of Mediterranean oak forests. Web Ecology, 6, 67–74.Google Scholar

Heil, M. (2010). Plastic defense expression in plants. Evolutionary Ecology 24, 555–569.Google Scholar

Heil, M. (2013). Let the best one stay: screening of ant defenders by Acacia host plants functions independently of partner choice or host sanctions. Journal of Ecology, 101, 684–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heil, M. (2015). Extrafloral nectar at the plant-insect interface: a spotlight on chemical ecology, phenotypic plasticity, and food webs. Annual Review of Entomology, 60, 213–232.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Baumann, B., Krüger, R., and Linsenmair, K. E. (2004). Main nutrient compounds in food bodies of Mexican Acacia ant-plants. Chemoecology, 14, 45–52.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Delsinne, T., Hilpert, A. et al. (2002). Reduced chemical defence in ant-plants? A critical re-evaluation of a widely accepted hypothesis. Oikos, 99, 457–468.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Fiala, B., Baumann, B. and Linsenmair, K. E. (2000). Temporal, spatial and biotic variations in extrafloral nectar secretion by Macaranga tanarius. Functional Ecology, 14, 749–757.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Fiala, B., Kaiser, W. and Linsenmair, K. E. (1998). Chemical contents of Macaranga food bodies: adaptations to their role in ant attraction and nutrition. Functional Ecology, 12, 117–122.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Fiala, B., Linsenmair, K. E., Zotz, G. and Menke, P. (1997). Food body production in Macaranga triloba (Euphorbiaceae): a plant investment in anti-herbivore defence via symbiotic ant partners. Journal of Ecology, 85, 847–861.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Gonzàlez-Teuber, M., Clement, L. W. et al. (2009). Divergent investment strategies of Acacia myrmecophytes and the Academy coexistence of mutualists and exploiters. Proceedings of the National of Sciences, 106, 18091–18096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heil, M., Hilpert, A., Fiala, B. et al. (2002). Nutrient allocation of Macaranga triloba ant plants to growth, photosynthesis and indirect defence. Functional Ecology, 16, 475–483.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Hilpert, A., Krüger, R. and Linsenmair, K. E. (2004). Competition among visitors to extrafloral nectaries as a source of ecological costs of an indirect defence. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 20, 201–208.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Koch, T., Hilpert, A. et al. (2001). Extrafloral nectar production of the ant-associated plant, Macaranga tanarius, is an induced, indirect, defensive response elicited by jasmonic acid. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98, 1083–1088.Google Scholar

Hemming, J. D. and Lindroth, R. L. (1999). Effects of light and nutrient availability on aspen: growth, phytochemistry, and insect performance. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 25, 1687–1714.Google Scholar

Herms, D. A. and Mattson, W. J. (1992). The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. Quarterly Review of Biology, 67, 283–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holland, J. N., Chamberlain, S. A. and Horn, K. C. (2010). Temporal variation in extrafloral nectar secretion by reproductive tissues of the senita cactus, Pachycereus schottii (Cactaceae), in the Sonoran Desert of Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments, 74, 712–714.Google Scholar

Howe, H. F. and Westley, L. C. (1988). Ecological Relationships of Plants and Animals. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Huang, W., Siemann, E., Wheeler, G. S. et al. (2010). Resource allocation to defence and growth are driven by different responses to generalist and specialist herbivory in an invasive plant. Journal of Ecology, 98, 1157–1167.Google Scholar

Izaguirre, M. M., Mazza, C. A., Astigueta, M. S., Ciarla, A. M. and Ballaré, C. L. (2013). No time for candy: passionfruit (Passiflora edulis) plants down-regulate damage-induced extra floral nectar production in response to light signals of competition. Oecologia, 173, 213–221.Google Scholar

Izzo, T. J. and Vasconcelos, H. L. (2002). Cheating the cheater: domatia loss minimizes the effects of ant castration in an Amazonian ant-plant. Oecologia, 133, 200–205.Google Scholar

Itioka, T. (2005). Diversity of anti-herbivore defenses in Macaranga. In Pollination Ecology and the Rain Forest: Sarawak Studies, D. W. Roubik, S. Sakai and A. A. H. Karim (eds.). Ecological Studies, 174. New York: Springer, pp. 158–171.Google Scholar

Jones, I. M. and Koptur, S. (2015a). Dynamic extrafloral nectar production: The timing of leaf damage affects the defensive response in Senna mexicana var. chapmanii (Fabaceae). American Journal of Botany 102, 58–66.Google Scholar

Jones, I. M. and Koptur, S. (2015b). Quantity over quality: light intensity, but not red/far-red ratio, affects extrafloral nectar production in Senna mexicana var. chapmanii. Ecology and Evolution, 5, 4108–4114.Google Scholar

Katayama, N. and Suzuki, N. (2011). Anti-herbivory defense of two Vicia species with and without extrafloral nectaries. Plant Ecology, 212, 743–752.Google Scholar

Kersch, M. F. and Fonseca, C. R. (2005). Abiotic factors and the conditional outcome of an ant-plant mutualism. Ecology, 86, 2117–2126.Google Scholar

Kitajima, K., Llorens, A. M., Stefanescu, C. et al. (2012). How cellulose-based leaf toughness and lamina density contribute to long leaf lifespans of shade-tolerant species. New Phytologist, 195, 640–652.Google Scholar

Kobayashi, S., Asai, T., Fujimoto, Y. and Kohshima, S. (2008). Anti-herbivore structures of Paulownia tomentosa: morphology, distribution, chemical constituents and changes during shoot and leaf development. Annals of Botany, 101, 1035–1047.Google Scholar

Koptur, S. (1985). Alternative defenses against herbivores in Inga (Fabaceae: Mimosoideae) over an elevational gradient. Ecology, 66, 1639–1650.Google Scholar

Koptur, S. (1992). Extrafloral nectary-mediated interactions between insects and plants. Insect Plant Interactions, 4, 81–129.Google Scholar

Koricheva, J. and Romero, G. Q. (2012). You get what you pay for: reward-specific trade-offs among direct and ant-mediated defences in plants. Biology Letters, 8, 628–630.Google Scholar

Kost, C. and Heil, M. (2005). Increased availability of extrafloral nectar reduces herbivory in Lima bean plants (Phaseolus lunatus, Fabaceae). Basic and Applied Ecology, 6, 237–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kost, C. and Heil, M. (2006). Herbivore-induced plant volatiles induce an indirect defence in neighbouring plants. Journal of Ecology, 94, 619–628.Google Scholar

Kost, C. and Heil, M. (2008). The defensive role of volatile emission and extrafloral nectar secretion for lima bean in nature. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 34, 2–13.Google Scholar

Lach, L., Parr, C. L. and Abott, K. L. (2010). Ant Ecology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Letourneau, D. K. and Barbosa, P. (1999). Ants, Stem Borers, and Pubescence in Endospermum in Papua New Guinea1. Biotropica, 31, 295–302.Google Scholar

LeVan, K. E., Hung, K. L. J., McCann, K. R., Ludka, J. T. and Holway, D. A. (2014). Floral visitation by the Argentine ant reduces pollinator visitation and seed set in the coast barrel cactus, Ferocactus viridescens. Oecologia, 174, 163–171.Google Scholar

Li, T., Holopainen, J. K., Kokko, H., Tervahauta, A. I. and Blande, J. D. (2012). Herbivore-induced aspen volatiles temporally regulate two different indirect defences in neighbouring plants. Functional Ecology, 26, 1176–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malé, P. J. G., Leroy, C., Dejean, A., Quilichini, A. and Orivel, J. (2012). An ant symbiont directly and indirectly limits its host plant’s reproductive success. Evolutionary Ecology, 26, 55–63.Google Scholar

Maschwitz, U., Fiala, B., Davies, S. J. and Linsenmair, K. E. (1996). A south-east asian myrmecophyte with two alternative inhabitants: Camponotus or Crematogaster as partners of Macaranga lamellate. Ecotropica 2, 26–132.Google Scholar

McKey, D. (1974). Ant-plants: selective eating of an unoccupied Barteria by a Colobus monkey. Biotropica, 6, 269–270.Google Scholar

Millán-Cañongo, C., Orona-Tamayo, D. and Heil, M. (2014). Phloem sugar flux and jasmonic acid-responsive cell wall invertase control extrafloral nectar secretion in Ricinus communis. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 40, 760–769.Google Scholar

Miller, T. E. (2014). Plant size and reproductive state affect the quantity and quality of rewards to animal mutualists. Journal of Ecology, 102, 496–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mithöfer, A. and Boland, W. (2012). Plant defense against herbivores: chemical aspects. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 63, 431–450.Google Scholar

Mody, K. and Linsenmair, K. E. (2004). Plant-attracted ants affect arthropod community structure but not necessarily herbivory. Ecological Entomology, 29, 217–225.Google Scholar

Mondor, E. B. and Addicott, J. F. (2003). Conspicuous extrafloral nectaries are inducible in Vicia faba. Ecology Letters, 6, 495–497.Google Scholar

Murase, K., Itioka, T., Nomura, M. and Yamane, S. (2003). Intraspecific variation in the status of ant symbiosis on a myrmecophyte, Macaranga bancana, between primary and secondary forests in Borneo. Population Ecology, 45, 221–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ness, J. H. (2003). Catalpa bignonioides alters extrafloral nectar production after herbivory and attracts ant bodyguards. Oecologia, 134, 210–218.Google Scholar

Ness, J. H. (2006). A mutualism’s indirect costs: the most aggressive plant bodyguards also deter pollinators. Oikos, 113, 506–514.Google Scholar

Newman, J. R. and Wagner, D. (2013). The influence of water availability and defoliation on extrafloral nectar secretion in quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides). Botany, 91, 761–767.Google Scholar

Newman, J. R., Wagner, D. and Doak, P. (2015). Impact of extrafloral nectar availability and plant genotype on ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) visitation to quaking aspen (Salicaceae). The Canadian Entomologist, 148, 1–7.Google Scholar

Nogueira, A., Rey, P. J. and Lohmann, L. G. (2012). Evolution of extrafloral nectaries: adaptive process and selective regime changes from forest to savanna. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 25, 2325–2340.Google Scholar

O’Dowd, D. J. (1979). Foliar nectar production and ant activity on a neotropical tree, Ochroma pyramidale. Oecologia, 43, 233–248.Google Scholar

O’Dowd, D. J. (1982). Pearl bodies as ant food: an ecological role for some leaf emergences of tropical plants. Biotropica, 14, 40–49.Google Scholar

Oliveira, K. N., Coley, P. D., Kursar, T. A. et al. (2015). The effect of symbiotic ant colonies on plant growth: a test using an Azteca-Cecropia system. PloS one, 10, e0120351.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Stanton, M. L., Young, T. P. et al. (2008). Breakdown of an ant-plant mutualism follows the loss of large herbivores from an African savanna. Science, 319, 192–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Philpott, S. M., Perfecto, I., Armbrecht, I. and Parr, C. L. (2010). Ant diversity and function in disturbed and changing habitats. Ant Ecology. New York: Oxford University Press, 137–157.Google Scholar

Pulice, C. E. and Packer, A. A. (2008). Simulated herbivory induces extrafloral nectary production in Prunus avium. Functional Ecology, 22, 801–807.Google Scholar

Radhika, V., Kost, C., Mithöfer, A. and Boland, W. (2010). Regulation of extrafloral nectar secretion by jasmonates in lima bean is light dependent. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 17228–17233.Google Scholar

Raine, N. E., Willmer, P. and Stone, G. N. (2002). Spatial structuring and floral avoidance behavior prevent ant-pollinator conflict in a Mexican ant-acacia. Ecology, 83, 3086–3096.Google Scholar

Rico-Gray, V. and Oliveira, P. S. (2007). The Ecology and Evolution of Ant-Plant Interactions. London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Risch, S. J. and Rickson, F. R. (1981). Mutualism in which ants must be present before plants produce food bodies. Nature, 291, 149–150.Google Scholar

Rosumek, F. B., Silveira, F. A., Neves, F. D. S. et al. (2009). Ants on plants: a meta-analysis of the role of ants as plant biotic defenses. Oecologia, 160, 537–549.Google Scholar

Rudgers, J. A. and Strauss, S. Y. (2004). A selection mosaic in the facultative mutualism between ants and wild cotton. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 271, 2481–2488.Google Scholar

Rudgers, J. A., Strauss, S. Y. and Wendel, J. F. (2004). Trade-offs among anti-herbivore resistance traits: insights from Gossypieae (Malvaceae). American Journal of Botany, 91, 871–880.Google Scholar

Rutter, M. T. and Rausher, M. D. (2004). Natural selection on extrafloral nectar production in Chamaecrista fasciculata: the costs and benefits of a mutualism trait. Evolution, 58, 2657–2668.Google Scholar

Schupp, E. W. and Feener, D. H. (1991). Phylogeny, lifeform, and habitat dependence of ant-defended plants in a Panamanian forest. In Ant-Plant Interactions, Huxley, C. R. and Cutler, D. F. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slaymaker, D. H., Navarre, D. A., Clark, D. et al. (2002). The tobacco salicylic acid-binding protein 3 (SABP3) is the chloroplast carbonic anhydrase, which exhibits antioxidant activity and plays a role in the hypersensitive defense response. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99, 11640–11645.Google Scholar

Smith, L. L., Lanza, J. and Smith, G. C. (1990). Amino acid concentrations in extrafloral nectar of Impatiens sultani increase after simulated herbivory. Ecology, 71, 107–115.Google Scholar

Stamp, N. (2003). Out of the quagmire of plant defense hypotheses. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 78, 23–55.Google Scholar

Stanton, M. L. and Palmer, T. M. (2011). The high cost of mutualism: effects of four species of East African ant symbionts on their myrmecophyte host tree. Ecology, 92, 1073–1082.Google Scholar

Stephenson, A. G. (1982). The role of the extrafloral nectaries of Catalpa speciosa in limiting herbivory and increasing fruit production. Ecology, 63, 663–669.Google Scholar

Steward, J. L. and Keeler, K. H. (1988). Are there trade-offs among antiherbivore defenses in Ipomoea (Convolvulaceae)? Oikos, 53, 79–86.Google Scholar

Trager, M. D., Bhotika, S., Hostetler, J. A. et al. (2010). Benefits for plants in ant-plant protective mutualisms: a meta-analysis. PLoS one, 5, e14308.Google Scholar

Trager, M. D. and Bruna, E. M. (2006). Effects of plant age, experimental nutrient addition and ant occupancy on herbivory in a neotropical myrmecophyte. Journal of Ecology, 94, 1156–1163.Google Scholar

Tripathi, S. N. and Raghubanshi, A. S. (2013). Seedling growth of five tropical dry forest tree species in relation to light and nitrogen gradients. Journal of Plant Ecology, 7, 250–263.Google Scholar

Wagner, D. and Fleur Nicklen, E. (2010). Ant nest location, soil nutrients and nutrient uptake by ant associated plants: Does extrafloral nectar attract ant nests and thereby enhance plant nutrition? Journal of Ecology, 98, 614–624.Google Scholar

Walters, D. (2011). Plant Defense: Warding off Attack by Pathogens, Herbivores and Parasitic Plants. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Wang, Y., Carrillo, J., Siemann, E. et al. (2013). Specificity of extrafloral nectar induction by herbivores differs among native and invasive populations of tallow tree. Annals of Botany, mct129.Google Scholar

Webber, B. L., Abaloz, B. A. and Woodrow, I. E. (2007). Myrmecophilic food body production in the understorey tree, Ryparosa kurrangii (Achariaceae), a rare Australian rainforest taxon. New Phytologist, 173, 250–263.Google Scholar

Weber, M. G. and Keeler, K. H. (2013). The phylogenetic distribution of extrafloral nectaries in plants. Annals of Botany, 111, 1251–1261.Google Scholar

Wäckers, F. L. and Bezemer, T. M. (2003). Root herbivory induces an above-ground indirect defence. Ecology Letters, 6, 9–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wäckers, F. L., Zuber, D., Wunderlin, R. and Keller, F. (2001). The effect of herbivory on temporal and spatial dynamics of foliar nectar production in cotton and castor. Annals of Botany, 87, 365–370.Google Scholar

Wildermuth, M. C., Dewdney, J., Wu, G., and Ausubel, F. M. (2001). Isochorismate synthase is required to synthesize salicylic acid for plant defence. Nature, 414, 562–565.Google Scholar

Xu, F. F. and Chen, J. (2015). Extrafloral nectar secretion is mainly determined by carbon fixation under herbivore-free condition in the tropical shrub Clerodendrum philippinum var. simplex. Flora-Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants, 217, 10–13.Google Scholar

Yamawo, A. and Hada, Y. (2010). Effects of light on direct and indirect defences against herbivores of young plants of Mallotus japonicus demonstrate a trade-off between two indirect defence traits. Annals of Botany, 106, 143–148.Google Scholar

Yamawo, A., Hada, Y. and Suzuki, N. (2012a). Variations in direct and indirect defenses against herbivores on young plants of Mallotus japonicus in relation to soil moisture conditions. Journal of Plant Research, 125, 71–76.Google Scholar

Yamawo, A., Katayama, N., Suzuki, N. and Hada, Y. (2012b). Plasticity in the expression of direct and indirect defence traits of young plants of Mallotus japonicus in relation to soil nutritional conditions. Plant Ecology, 213, 127–132.Google Scholar

Yamawo, A., Tagawa, J., Hada, Y. and Suzuki, N. (2014). Different combinations of multiple defence traits in an extrafloral nectary bearing plant growing under various habitat conditions. Journal of Ecology, 102, 238–247.Google Scholar

Yamawo, A., Tokuda, M., Katayama, N., Yahara, T. and Tagawa, J. (2015). Ant-attendance in extrafloral nectar-bearing plants promotes growth and decreases the expression of traits related to direct defenses. Evolutionary Biology, 42, 191–198.Google Scholar

Andersen, A. N. (2000). A global ecology of rainforest ants: functional groups in relation to environmental stress and disturbance. In Ants: standard methods for measuring and monitoring biodiversity, ed. Agosti, D., Majer, J. D., Alonso, L. E. & Schultz, T. R.: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 35–44.Google Scholar

Bascompte, J., Aizen, M., Fontaine, C. et al. (2010). Symposium 6: mutualistic networks. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 91(3), 367–370.Google Scholar

Bascompte, J., Jordano, P., Melián, C. J. & Olesen, J. M. (2003). The nested assembly of plant–animal mutualistic networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100, 9383–9387.Google Scholar

Bascompte, J., Jordano, P. & Olesen, J. M. (2006). Asymmetric coevolutionary networks facilitate biodiversity maintenance. Science 312, 431–433.Google Scholar

Bentley, B. L. (1976). Plants bearing extrafloral nectaries and the associated ant community: Interhabitat differences in the reduction of herbivore damage. Ecology 57, 815–820.Google Scholar

Blüthgen, N., Verhaagh, M., Goitía, W. et al. (2000). How plants shape the ant community in the Amazonian rainforest canopy: the key role of extrafloral nectaries and homopteran honeydew. Oecologia 125(2), 229–240.Google Scholar

Campos-Navarrete, M. J., Abdala-Roberts, L., Munguía-Rosas, M. A. & Parra-Tabla, V. (2015). Are tree species diversity and genotypic diversity effects on insect herbivores mediated by ants? PloS One 10(8): e0132671.Google Scholar

Chavarro-Rodríguez, N., Díaz-Castelazo, C. & Rico-Gray, V. (2013). Characterization and functional ecology of the extrafloral nectar of Cedrela odorata in contrasting growth environments in central Veracruz, Mexico. Botany 91, 695–701.Google Scholar

Cuautle, M. & Rico-Gray, V. (2003). The effect of wasps and ants on the reproductive success of the extrafloral nectaried plant. Turnera ulmifolia Turneraceae. Functional Ecology, 17, 417–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dáttilo, W., Díaz-Castelazo, C. & Rico-Gray, V. (2014a). Ant dominance hierarchy determines the nested pattern in ant-plant networks. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 113, 405–414.Google Scholar

Dáttilo, W., Fagundes, R., Gurka, C. A. Q. et al. (2014b). Individual-based ant-plant networks: diurnal-nocturnal structure and species-area relationship. PLoS One 9(6), e99838.Google Scholar

Dáttilo, W., Guimarães, P. R., & Izzo, T. J. (2013a). Spatial structure of ant–plant mutualistic networks. Oikos, 122, 1643–1648.Google Scholar

Dáttilo, W., Marquitti, F. M. D., Guimarães, P. R. & Izzo, T. J. (2014c). The structure of ant-plant ecological networks: is abundance enough?. Ecology 95, 475–485.Google Scholar

Dáttilo, W., Rico-Gray, V., Rodrigues, D. J. & Izzo, T. J. (2013b). Soil and vegetation features determine the nested pattern of ant-plant networks in a tropical rainforest. Ecological Entomology 38, 374–380.Google Scholar

Del-Claro, K., Rico-Gray, V., Torezan-Silingardi, H. M. et al. (2016). Loss and gains in ant–plant interactions mediated by extrafloral nectar: fidelity, cheats, and lies. Insectes Sociaux 63(2), 207–221.Google Scholar

Díaz-Castelazo, C., Guimarães, P., Jordano, P. et al. (2010). Changes of a mutualistic network over time: reanalysis over a 10-year period. Ecology 91(3), 793–801.Google Scholar

Díaz-Castelazo, C., Rico-Gray, V., Oliveira, P. S. & Cuautle, M. (2004). Extrafloral nectary-mediated ant–plant interactions in the coastal vegetation of Veracruz, Mexico: richness, occurrence, seasonality and ant foraging patterns. Ecoscience 11, 472–481.Google Scholar

Díaz-Castelazo, C., Rico-Gray, V., Ortega, F. & Ángeles, G. (2005). Morphological and secretory characterization of extrafloral nectaries in plants of coastal Veracruz, Mexico. Annals of Botany 96(7), 1175–1189.Google Scholar

Díaz-Castelazo, C., Sánchez-Galván, I. R., Guimarães, P. R., Raimundo, R. L. G. & Rico-Gray, V. (2013). Long–term temporal variation in the organization of an ant-plant network. Annals of Botany 111, 1285–1293.Google Scholar

Fernández-Martínez, M. J. & Díaz-Castelazo, C. (2009). Caracterización ecológica de Cedrela odorata y patrones de infestación por Hypsipyla grandella en selvas y plantaciones de Veracruz. In Serie memorias científicas 15. XXII Reunión científica Tecnológica Forestal y Agropecuarias, ed. INIFAP, Veracruz, México, pp. 301–310.Google Scholar

Guimarães, P. R. Jr., Rico-Gray, V., Oliveira, P. S. et al. (2007). Interaction intimacy affects structure and coevolutionary dynamics in mutualistic networks. Current Biology 17, 1797–1803.Google Scholar

Heil, M. (2015). Extrafloral nectar at the plant-insect interface: a spotlight on chemical ecology, phenotypic plasticity, and food webs. Annual Review of Entomology 60, 213–232.Google Scholar

Hernández-Villanueva, M. A. (2010). Interacción insecto planta mediada por nectarios extraflorales del cedro rojo (Cedrela odorata, Meliaceae) en selvas y plantaciones del centro de Veracruz. BSc thesis, Benemérita Universidad de Puebla. Puebla, México.Google Scholar

Jordano, P., Bascompte, J., & Olesen, J. M. (2003). Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant–animal interactions. Ecology Letters, 6, 69–81.Google Scholar

Kersch, M. F. & Fonseca, C. R. (2005). Abiotic factors and the conditional outcome of an ant–plant mutualism. Ecology 86(8), 2117–2126.Google Scholar

Koptur, S. (2005). Nectar as fuel for plant protectors. In Plant-provided food for carnivorous insects: a protective mutualism and its applications, ed. Wäckers, F. L., van Rijn, P. C. J. & Bruin, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 75–108.Google Scholar

Koptur, S. & Lawton, J. H. (1988). Interactions among vetches bearing extrafloral nectaries, their biotic protective agents, and herbivores. Ecology 69, 278–293.Google Scholar

López-Carretero, A., Díaz-Castelazo, C., Boege, K. & Rico-Gray, V. (2014). Evaluating the spatio-temporal factors that structure network parameters of plant-herbivore interactions. PLoS One 9(10), e110430.Google Scholar

Ness, J. H. & Bronstein, J. L. (2004). The effects of invasive ants on prospective ant mutualists. Biological Invasions 6, 445–461.Google Scholar

Oliveira, P. S. & Freitas, A. V. L. (2004). Ant-plant-herbivore interactions in the neotropical cerrado savanna. Naturwissenschaften 91, 557–570.Google Scholar

Oliveira, P. S., Rico-Gray, V., Díaz-Castelazo, C. & Castillo-Guevara, C. (1999). Interactions between ants, extrafloral nectaries and insect herbivores in neotropical coastal sand dunes: Herbivore deterrence by visiting ants increases fruit set in Opuntia stricta (Cactaceae). Functional Ecology 13, 623–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pacini, E. & Nepi, M. (2007). Nectar production and presentation. In Nectaries and nectar, ed. Nicolson, S. W., Nepi, M. & Pacini, E.. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 167–214.Google Scholar

Pemberton, R. W. (1988). The abundance of plants bearing extrafloral nectaries in Colorado and Mojave desert communities of Southern California. Madroño 35(3), 238–246.Google Scholar

Pennington, T. D. & Sarukhán, J. (2005). Árboles tropicales de México: Manual para la identificación de las principales especies. 3rd ed. México, D. F. Fondo de cultura económica, UNAM.Google Scholar

Perfecto, I. (1990). Indirect and direct effects in a tropical agroecosystem: the maize-pest-ant system in Nicaragua. Ecology 71, 2125–2134.Google Scholar

Perfecto, I. (1991). Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) as natural control agents of pests in irrigated maize in Nicaragua. Journal of Economic Entomology 84, 65–70.Google Scholar

Perfecto, I. & Sediles, A. (1992). Vegetational diversity, ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), and herbivorous pests in a neotropical agroecosystem. Environmental Entomology 21, 61–67.Google Scholar

Perfecto, I. & Vandermeer, J. H. (1994). Understanding biodiversity loss in agroecosystems: reduction of ant diversity resulting from transformation of the coffee ecosystem in Costa Rica. Entomological Trends in Agricultural Science 2, 7–13.Google Scholar

Perfecto, I. & Vandermeer, J. H. (2002). Quality of agroecological matrix in a tropical montane landscape: ants in coffee plantations in southern Mexico. Conservation Biology 16, 174–182.Google Scholar

Philpott, S. M., Greenberg, R., Bichier, P. & Perfecto, I. (2004a). Impacts of major predators on tropical agroforest arthropods: comparisons within and across taxa. Oecologia 140, 140–149.Google Scholar

Philpott, S. M., Maldonado, J., Vandermeer, J. & Perfecto, I. (2004b). Taking trophic cascades up a level: behaviorally-modified effects of phorid flies on ants and ant prey in coffee agroecosystems. Oikos 105, 141–147.Google Scholar

Rico-Gray, V., Díaz-Castelazo, C., Ramírez-Hernández, A., Guimarães, P. R. Jr. & Holland, J. N. (2012). Abiotic factors shape temporal variation in the structure of a mutualistic ant-plant network. Arthropod-Plant Interactions 6, 189–295.Google Scholar

Rico-Gray, V., García-Franco, J. G., Palacios-Ríos, M. et al. (1998). Geographical and seasonal variation in the diversity of ant-plant association in Mexico. Biotropica 30, 190–200.Google Scholar

Rico-Gray, V. & Oliveira, P. S. (2007). The ecology and evolution of ant–plant interactions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Rudgers, J. A. & Gardener, M. (2004). Extrafloral nectar as a resource mediating multispecies interactions. Ecology 85, 1495–1502.Google Scholar

Rudgers, J. A. & Strauss, S. Y. (2004). A selection mosaic in the facultative mutualism between ants and wild cotton. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 271(1556), 2481–2488.Google Scholar

Sánchez-Galván, I. R., Díaz-Castelazo, C. & Rico-Gray, V. (2012). Effect of hurricane Karl on a plant–ant network occurring in coastal Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Tropical Ecology 28, 603–609.Google Scholar

Schupp, E. W. & Feener, D. H. (1991). Phylogeny, lifeform and habitat dependence of ant-defended plants in a Panamanian forest. In Ant-plant interactions, ed. Huxley, C. R. & Cutler, D. F., eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 175–197.Google Scholar

van Rijn, P. C., & Sabelis, M. W. (2005). Impact of plant-provided food on herbivore-carnivore dynamics. In Plant-provided food for carnivorous insects: a protective mutualism and its applications, ed. F. L. Wäckers, P. C. J. van Rijn & J. Bruin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 223–266.Google Scholar

Waser, N. M. & Ollerton, J. (2006). Plant-pollinator interactions: from specialization to generalization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Yamawo, A. & Hada, Y. (2010). Effects of light on direct and indirect defences against herbivores of young plants of Mallotus japonicus demonstrate a trade-off between two indirect defence traits. Annals of Botany, 106(1), 143–148.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, J. G. (1932). Uber die extrafloralen Nektarien der Angiospermen. Beihefte zum Botanischen Zentralblatt 49, 99–196.Google Scholar

Andrews, P., and Bamford, M.. (2008). Past and present vegetation ecology of Laetoli, Tanzania. Journal of Human Evolution 54,78–98.Google Scholar

Archetti, M., Ubeda, F., Fudenberg, D., Green, J., Pierce, N. E., and Yu, D. W.. (2011). Let the right one in: a microeconomic approach to partner choice in mutualisms. American Naturalist 177,75–85.Google Scholar

Archibald, S. (2016). Managing the human component of fire regimes: Lessons from Africa. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B 371:20150346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0346Google Scholar

Archibald, S., Staver, A.C., and Levin, S.A.. (2012). Evolution of human-driven fire regimes in Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, 847–852.Google Scholar

Arshad, M. A. (1981). Physical and chemical properties of termite mounds of two species of Macrotermes (Isoptera, Termitidae) and the surrounding soils of the semi-arid savanna of Kenya. Soil Science 132,161–174.Google Scholar

Baker, C. (2015). Complexity in Mutualisms: Indirect Interactions with Multiple Parties. Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Belsky, A. J., Amundson, R. G., Duxbury, J. M., Riha, S. J., Ali, A. R., and Mwonga, S. M.. (1989). The effects of trees on their physical, chemical, and biological environments in a semi-arid savanna in Kenya. Journal of Applied Ecology 26,1005–1024.Google Scholar

Brody, A. K., Palmer, T. M., Fox-Dobbs, K. and Doak, D. F.. (2010). Termites, vertebrate herbivores and the fruiting success of Acacia drepanolobium. Ecology 91,399–407.Google Scholar

Chomicki, G., Ward, P. S., and Renner, S. S.. (2015). Macroevolutionary assembly of ant/plant symbioses. Pseudomyrmex ants and their ant-housing plants in the Neotropics. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 282,20152200.Google Scholar

Cochard, R., and Edwards, P. J.. (2011). Structure and biomass along an Acacia zanzibarica woodland-savanna gradient in a former ranching area in coastal Tanzania. Journal of Vegetation Science 22,475–489.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. W., Longino, J. T., and Snelling, R. R.. (1988). Pruning of host plant neighbors by ants: An experimental approach. Ecology 69,801–808.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. W., and McKey, D.. (1993). The evolutionary ecology of symbiotic ant – plant relationships. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 2,13–83.Google Scholar

Dayton, P. K. (1972). Toward an understanding of community resilience and the potential effects of enrichments to the benthos at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Pages 81–96. In Proceedings of the Colloquium on Conservation Problems. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar

Fiala, B., Maschwitz, U., Pong, T. Y., and Helbig, A. J.. (1989). Studies of a South East Asian ant-plant association: protection of Macaranga trees by Crematogaster borneensis. Oecologia 79,463–470.Google Scholar

Ford, A. T., Goheen, J. R., Otieno, T. O., Arcese, P., Palmer, T. M., Woodroffe, R., Ward, D., and Pringle, R. M.. (2014). Large carnivores make savanna tree communities less thorny. Science 346,346–349.Google Scholar

Fox-Dobbs, K., Doak, D. F., Brody, A. K., and Palmer, T. M.. (2010). Termites create spatial structure and govern ecosystem function by affecting N-2 fixation in an East African savanna. Ecology 91,1296–1307.Google Scholar

Frederickson, M. E. (2009). Conflict over reproduction in an ant-plant symbiosis: why Allomerus octoarticulatus ants sterilize Cordia nodosa trees. American Naturalist 173,675–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Frederickson, M. E., Ravenscraft, A., Miller, G. A., Hernandez, L. M. A., Booth, G., and Pierce, N. E.. (2012). The direct and ecological costs of an ant-plant symbiosis. American Naturalist 179,768–778.Google Scholar

Goheen, J. R., and Palmer, T. M.. (2010). Defensive plant-ants stabilize megaherbivore-driven landscape change in an African savanna. Current Biology 20,1768–1772.Google Scholar

Heil, M. (2013. Let the best one stay: screening of ant defenders by Acacia host plants functions independently of partner choice or host sanctions. Journal of Ecology 101,684–688.Google Scholar

Heil, M., and McKey, D.. (2003). Protective ant-plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 34,425–453.Google Scholar

Hocking, B. (1970). Insect associations with the swollen thorn acacias. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society of London 122,211–255.Google Scholar

Holdo, R. M., Sinclair, A. R. E., Dobson, A. P., Metzger, K. L., Bolker, B. M., Ritchie, M. E., and Holt, R. D.. (2009). A disease-mediated trophic cascade in the Serengeti and its implications for ecosystem C. Plos Biology 7, e1000210.Google Scholar

Huntzinger, M., Karban, R., Young, T. P., and Palmer, T. M.. (2004). Relaxation of induced indirect defenses of acacias following exclusion of mammalian herbivores. Ecology 85,609–614.Google Scholar

Huxley, C. R. (1978). The ant-plants Myrmecodia and Hydnophytum (Rubiaceae), and the relationships between their morphology, ant occupants, physiology and ecology. New Phytologist 80,231–268.Google Scholar

Janzen, D. H. (1966). Coevolution of mutualism between ants and acacias in Central America. Evolution 20,249–275.Google Scholar

Janzen, D. H. (1969). Allelopathy by myrmecophytes: the ant Azteca as an allelopathic agent of Cecropia. Ecology 50,147–153.Google Scholar

Madden, D., and Young, T. P.. (1992). Symbiotic ants as an alternative defense against giraffe herbivory in spinescent Acacia drepanolobium. Oecologia 91,235–238.Google Scholar

Martins, D. J. (2010). Not all ants are equal: obligate acacia ants provide different levels of protection against mega-herbivores. African Journal of Ecology 48,1115–1122.Google Scholar

Martins, D. J. (2013). Effect of parasitoids, seed-predators and ant-mutualists on fruiting success and germination of Acacia drepanolobium in Kenya. African Journal of Ecology 51,562–570.Google Scholar

Midgley, J. J., Sawe, T., Abanyam, P., Hintsa, K., and Gacheru, P.. (2016). Spinescent East African savannah acacias also have thick bark, suggesting they evolved under both an intense fire and herbivory regime. African Journal of Ecology 54,118–120.Google Scholar

Morawetz, W., henzl, M., and Wallnöfer, B.. (1992). Tree killing by herbicide producing ants for the establishment of pure Tococa occidentalis populations in the Peruvian Amazon. Biodiversity and Conservation 1,19–33.Google Scholar

Ness, J. H. (2006). A mutualism’s indirect costs: the most aggressive plant bodyguards also deter pollinators. Oikos 113,506–514.Google Scholar

Okello, B. D., O’Connor, T. G., and Young, T. P.. (2001). Growth, biomass estimates, and charcoal production of Acacia drepanolobium in Laikipia, Kenya. Forest Ecology and Management 142,143–153.Google Scholar

Okello, B. D., and Young, T. P.. (2000). Effects of fire, bruchid beetles and soil type on the germination and seedling establishment of Acacia drepanolobium. African Journal of Range and Forage Science 17,45–61.Google Scholar

Okello, B. D., Young, T. P., Riginos, C., Kelly, D., and O’Connor, T. G.. (2008). Short-term survival and long-term mortality of Acacia drepanolobium after a controlled burn. African Journal of Ecology 46,395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Palmer, T. M. (2001). Competition and Coexistence in a Guild of African Acacia-Ants. PhD dissertation. University of California Davis, Davis, CA.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M. (2003). Spatial habitat heterogeneity influences competition and coexistence in an African acacia ant guild. Ecology 84,2843–2855.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M. (2004). Wars of attrition: colony size determines competitive outcomes in a guild of African acacia-ants. Animal Behaviour 68,993–1004.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., and Brody, A. K.. (2007). Mutualism as reciprocal exploitation: ant guards defend foliar but not reproductive structures of an African ant-plant. Ecology 88,3004–3011.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., and Brody, A. K.. (2013). Enough is enough: the effects of symbiotic ant abundance on herbivory, growth and reproduction in an African acacia. Ecology 94,683–691.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Doak, D. F., Stanton, M. L., Bronstein, J. L., Kiers, E. T., Young, T. P., Goheen, J. R., and Pringle, R. M.. (2010). Synergy of multiple partners, including freeloaders, increases host fitness in a multispecies mutualism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107,17234–17239.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Pringle, E. G., Stier, A. C., and Holt, R. D.. (2015). Mutualism in a community context. Pages 159–180. In Bronstein, J. L., editor. Mutualism. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Stanton, M. L., Young, T. P., Goheen, J. R., Pringle, R. M., and Karban, R.. (2008a). Breakdown of an ant-plant mutualism follows the loss of large herbivores from an African Savanna. Science 319,192–195.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Stanton, M. L., Young, T. P., Goheen, J. R., Pringle, R. M., and Karban, R.. (2008b). Putting ant-Acacia mutualisms to the fire – response. Science 319,1760–1761.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Young, T. P., and Stanton, M. L.. (2002). Burning bridges: Priority effects and the persistence of a competitively subordinate acacia-ant in Laikipia, Kenya. Oecologia 133,372–379.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Young, T. P., Stanton, M. L., and Wenk, E.. (2000). Short-term dynamics of an acacia ant community in Laikipia, Kenya. Oecologia 123,425–435.Google Scholar

Pringle, E. G., Akcay, E., Raab, T. K., Dirzo, R., and Gordon, D. M.. (2013). Water stress strengthens mutualism among ants, trees, and scale insects. Plos Biology 11, e1001705.Google Scholar

Pringle, E. G., Dirzo, R., and Gordon, D. M.. (2011). Indirect benefits of symbiotic coccoids for an ant-defended myrmecophytic tree. Ecology 92,37–46.Google Scholar

Pringle, R. M., Doak, D. F., Brody, A. K., Jocque, R., and Palmer, T. M.. (2010). Spatial pattern enhances ecosystem functioning in an African savanna. Plos Biology 8, e1000377.Google Scholar

Pringle, R. M., and Fox-Dobbs, K.. (2008). Coupling of canopy and understory food webs by ground-dwelling predators. Ecology Letters 11,1328–1337.Google Scholar

Pringle, R. M., Prior, K. M., Palmer, T. M., Young, T. P., and Goheen, J. R.. (2016). Large herbivores promote habitat specialization and beta diversity of African savanna trees. Ecology 97,2640–2657.Google Scholar

Riginos, C. (2015). Climate and the landscape of fear in an African savanna. Journal of Animal Ecology 84,124–133.Google Scholar

Riginos, C., Grace, J. B., Augustine, D. J., and Young, T. P.. (2009). Local versus landscape-scale effects of savanna trees on grasses. Journal of Ecology 97,1337–1345.Google Scholar

Riginos, C., Karande, M. A., Rubenstein, D. I., and Palmer, T. M.. (2015). Disruption of a protective ant-plant mutualism by an invasive ant increases elephant damage to savanna trees. Ecology 96,654–661.Google Scholar

Rudolph, K. P., and McEntee, J. P.. (2016). Spoils of war and peace: enemy adoption and queen-right colony fusion follow costly intraspecific conflict in acacia ants. Behavioral Ecology 27,793–802.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Guajardo, J. C., Grossenbacher, D., Grosberg, R. K., Palmer, T. M., and Stanton, M. L.. (2017). Impacts of worker density in colony-level aggression, expansion, and survival of the acacia-ant Crematogaster mimosae. Ecological Monographs 87: 246–259.Google Scholar

Sagers, C. L., Ginger, S. M., and Evans, R. D.. (2000). Carbon and nitrogen isotopes trace nutrient exchange in an ant-plant mutualism. Oecologia 123,582–586.Google Scholar

Sensenig, R. L., Kimuyu, D. K., Ruiz-Guajardo, J. C., Riginos, C., and Young, T. P.. (2017). Fire disturbance disrupts an acacia ant-plant mutualism in favor of a subordinate ant species. Ecology 98, 1455–1464.Google Scholar

Stanton, M. L. (2003). Interacting guilds: moving beyond the pairwise perspective on mutualisms. American Naturalist 162,S10–S23.Google Scholar

Stanton, M. L., and Palmer, T. M.. (2011). The high cost of mutualism: effects of four species of East African ant symbionts on their myrmecophyte host tree. Ecology 92,1073–1082.Google Scholar

Stanton, M. L., Palmer, T. M., and Young, T. P.. (2002). Competition-colonization trade-offs in a guild of African acacia-ants. Ecological Monographs 72,347–363.Google Scholar

Stanton, M. L., Palmer, T. M., and Young, T. P.. (2005). Ecological barriers to early colony establishment in three coexisting acacia-ant species in Kenya. Insectes Sociaux 52,393–401.Google Scholar

Stanton, M. L., Palmer, T. M., Young, T. P., Evans, A., and Turner, M. L.. (1999). Sterilization and canopy modification of a swollen thorn acacia tree by a plant-ant. Nature 401,578–581.Google Scholar

Stapley, L. (1998). The interaction of thorns and symbiotic ants as an effective defence mechanism of swollen-thorn acacias. Oecologia 115,401–405.Google Scholar

Styrsky, J. D., and Eubanks, M. D.. (2007). Ecological consequences of interactions between ants and honeydew-producing insects. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 274,151–164.Google Scholar

Tarnita, C. E., Palmer, T. M., and Pringle, R. M.. (2014). Colonisation and competition dynamics can explain incomplete sterilisation parasitism in ant-plant symbioses. Ecology Letters 17,1290–1298.Google Scholar

Visiticao, J. M. (2011). Multi-Species Interactions in African Ant-Acacias. PhD Dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Vollrath, F., and Douglas-Hamilton, I.. (2002). African bees to control African elephants. Naturwissenschaften 89,508–511.Google Scholar

Willmer, P. G., Nuttman, C. V., Raine, N. E., Stone, G. N., Pattrick, J. G., Henson, K., Stillman, P., McIlroy, L., Potts, S. G., and Knudsen, J. T.. (2009). Floral volatiles controlling ant behaviour. Functional Ecology 23,888–900.Google Scholar

Willmer, P. G., and Stone, G. N.. (1997). How aggressive ant-guards assist seed-set in Acacia flowers. Nature 388,165–167.Google Scholar

Wood, W. F., and Chong, B.. (1975). Alarm pheremones of the east African acacia symbionts: Crematogaster mimosae and C. negriceps. Journal of the Georgia Entomological Society 10,332–334.Google Scholar

Young, T. P., Okello, B. D., Kinyua, D., and Palmer, T. M.. (1998). KLEE: a long-term multi-species herbivore exclusion experiment in Laikipia, Kenya. African Journal of Range Forage Science 14,94–102.Google Scholar

Young, T. P., Stubblefield, C. H., and Isbell, L. A.. (1997). Ants on swollen-thorn acacias: species coexistence in a simple system. Oecologia 109,98–107.Google Scholar

Yu, D. W., Wilson, H. B., Frederickson, M. E., Palomino, W., De la Colina, R., Edwards, D. P., and Balareso, A. A.. (2004). Experimental demonstration of species coexistence enabled by dispersal limitation. Journal of Animal Ecology 73,1102–1114.Google Scholar

Bale, J. S., Masters, G. J., Hodkinson, I. D. et al. (2002). Herbivory in global climate change research: direct effects of rising temperature on insect herbivores. Global Change Biology, 8, 1–16.Google Scholar

Ballhorn, D. J., Schmitt, I., Fankhauser, J. D., Katagiri, F. and Pfanz, H. (2011). CO2-mediated changes of plant traits and their effects on herbivores are determined by leaf age. Ecological Entomology, 36, 1–13.Google Scholar

Barton, B. T. and Ives, A. R. (2014). Direct and indirect effects of warming on aphids, their predators, and ant mutualists. Ecology, 95, 1479–84.Google Scholar

Bascompte, J. and Jordano, P. (2013). Mutualistic networks. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Blatrix, R., Bouamer, S., Morand, S. and Selosse, M. A. (2009). Ant-plant mutualisms should be viewed as symbiotic communities. Plant Signaling & Behavior, 4, 554–6. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02793.xGoogle Scholar

Blatrix, R., Djiéto-Lordon, C., Mondolot, L. et al. (2012). Plant-ants use symbiotic fungi as a food source: new insight into the nutritional ecology of ant-plant interactions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279, 3940–7. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1403.Google Scholar

Blatrix, R., McKey, D. and Born, C. (2013). Consequences of past climate change for species engaged in obligatory interactions. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 345, 306–15.Google Scholar

Brodie, J. F., Aslan, C. E., Rogers, H. S. et al. (2014). Secondary extinctions of biodiversity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 29, 664–72.Google Scholar

Bruna, E. M., Vasconcelos, H. L. and Heredia, S. (2005). The effect of habitat fragmentation on communities of mutualists: Amazonian ants and their host plants. Biological Conservation, 124, 209–16. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.01.026.Google Scholar

Chomicki, G., Ward, P. S. and Renner, S. S. (2015). Macroevolutionary assembly of ant/plant symbioses: Pseudomyrmex ants and their ant-housing plants in the Neotropics. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 282, 20152200. doi:10.1098/rspb.2015.2200.Google Scholar

Coley, P. D. (1998). Possible effects of climate change on plant/herbivore interactions in moist tropical forests. Climatic Change, 39, 455–72.Google Scholar

Cook, S. C. and Davidson, D. W. (2006). Nutritional and functional biology of exudate-feeding ants. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 118, 1–10.Google Scholar

Couture, J. J., Meehan, T. D., Kruger, E. L. and Lindroth, R. L. (2015). Insect herbivory alters impact of atmospheric change on northern temperate forests. Nature Plants, 1, 15016.Google Scholar

Dalecky, A., Debout, G., Estoup, A., McKey, D. B. and Kjellberg, F. (2007). Changes in mating system and social structure of the ant Petalomyrmex phylax are associated with range expansion in Cameroon. Evolution, 61, 579–95. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00044.x.Google Scholar

Dalecky, A., Gaume, L., Schatz, B., McKey, D. and Kjellberg, F. (2005). Facultative polygyny in the plant-ant Petalomyrmex phylax (Hymenoptera: Formicinae): sociogenetic and ecological determinants of queen number. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 86, 133–51.Google Scholar

Dáttilo, W., Izzo, T. J., Vasconcelos, H. L. and Rico-Gray, V. (2013). Strength of the modular pattern in Amazonian symbiotic ant–plant networks. Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 7, 455–61.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. W. (2005). Ecological stoichiometry of ants in a New World rain forest. Oecologia, 142, 221–31.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. W., Cook, S. C., Snelling, R. R. and Chua, T. H. (2003). Explaining the abundance of ants in lowland tropical rainforest canopies. Science, 300, 969–72. doi:10.1126/science.1082074.Google Scholar

Davies, S. J., Lum, S. K. Y., Chan, R. and Wang, L. K. (2001). Evolution of myrmecophytism in western Malesian Macaranga (Euphorbiaceae). Evolution, 55, 1542–59.Google Scholar

Debout, G., Dalecky, A., Ngomi, A. and McKey, D. (2009). Dynamics of species coexistence: maintenance of a plant-ant competitive metacommunity. Oikos, 118, 873–84. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.16317.x.Google Scholar

Defossez, E., Djiéto-Lordon, C., McKey, D., Selosse, M. A. and Blatrix, R. (2011). Plant-ants feed their host plant, but above all a fungal symbiont to recycle nitrogen. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 278, 1419–26. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1884.Google Scholar

Defossez, E., Selosse, M. A., Dubois, M. P. et al. (2009). Ant-plants and fungi: a new threeway symbiosis. New Phytologist, 182, 942–9. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02793.x.Google Scholar

DeLucia, E. H., Nabity, P. D., Zavala, J. A. and Berenbaum, M. R. (2012). Climate change: resetting plant-insect interactions. Plant Physiology, 160, 1677–85.Google Scholar

Diamond, J. (2002). Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domestication. Nature, 418, 700–7.Google Scholar

Diamond, S. E., Sorger, D. M., Hulcr, J. et al. (2012). Who likes it hot? A global analysis of the climatic, ecological, and evolutionary determinants of warming tolerance in ants. Global Change Biology, 18, 448–56. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02542.x.Google Scholar

Djiéto-Lordon, C., Dejean, A., Gibernau, M., Hossaert-McKey, M. and McKey, D. (2004). Symbiotic mutualism with a community of opportunistic ants: protection, competition, and ant occupancy of the myrmecophyte Barteria nigritana (Passifloraceae). Acta Oecologica, 26, 109–16.Google Scholar

Douglas, A. E. (2009). The microbial dimension in insect nutritional ecology. Functional Ecology, 23, 38–47. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2435.2008.01442.x.Google Scholar

Duarte Rocha, C. F. and Godoy Bergallo, H. (1992). Bigger ant colonies reduce herbivory and herbivore residence time on leaves of an ant-plant: Azteca muelleri vs. Coelomera ruficornis on Cecropia pachystachya. Oecologia, 91, 249–52.Google Scholar

Dunn, R. R., Harris, N. C., Colwell, R. K., Koh, L. P. and Sodhi, N. S. (2009). The sixth mass coextinction: are most endangered species parasites and mutualists? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276, 3037–45. doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.0413.Google Scholar

Ellers, J., Kiers, T. E., Currie, C. R., McDonald, B. R. and Visser, B. (2012). Ecological interactions drive evolutionary loss of traits. Ecology Letters, 15, 1071–82.Google Scholar

Emer, C., Venticinque, E. M. and Fonseca, C. R. (2013). Effects of dam-induced landscape fragmentation on Amazonian ant-plant mutualistic networks. Conservation Biology, 27, 763–73. doi:10.1111/cobi.12045.Google Scholar

Estes, J. A., Terborgh, J., Brashares, J. S. et al. (2011). Trophic downgrading of planet Earth. Science, 333, 301–6.Google Scholar

Fan, Y. and Wernegreen, J. J. (2013). Can’t take the heat: high temperature depletes bacterial endosymbionts of ants. Microbial Ecology, 66, 727–33.Google Scholar

Fayle, T. M., Edwards, D. P., Foster, W. A., Yusah, K. M. and Turner, E. C. (2015). An ant-plant by-product mutualism is robust to selective logging of rain forest and conversion to oil palm plantation. Oecologia, 178, 441–50.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, G., Davidowitz, G. and Bronstein, J. L. (2013). An herbivore’s thermal tolerance is higher than that of the ant defenders in a desert protection mutualism. Sociobiology, 60, 252–8.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, G., Lanan, M. C. and Bronstein, J. L. (2014). Thermal tolerance affects mutualist attendance in an ant–plant protection mutualism. Oecologia, 176, 129–38.Google Scholar

Fontúrbel, F. E. and Murúa, M. M. (2014). Microevolutionary effects of habitat fragmentation on plant-animal interactions. Advances in Ecology, 2014, 379267.Google Scholar

Frederickson, M. E. (2005). Ant species confer different partner benefits on two neotropical myrmecophytes. Oecologia, 143, 387–95. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1817-7.Google Scholar

Frederickson, M. E. (2009). Conflict over reproduction in an ant-plant symbiosis: why Allomerus octoarticulatus ants sterilize Cordia nodosa trees. The American Naturalist, 173, 675–81. doi:10.1086/597608Google Scholar

Frederickson, M. E., Ravenscraft, A., Hernandez, L. M. A. et al. (2013). What happens when ants fail at plant defence? Cordia nodosa dynamically adjusts its investment in both direct and indirect resistance traits in response to herbivore damage. Journal of Ecology, 101, 400–9.Google Scholar

Frederickson, M. E., Ravenscraft, A., Miller, G. A. et al. (2012). The direct and ecological costs of an ant-plant symbiosis. The American Naturalist, 179, 768–78. doi:10.1086/665654.Google Scholar

Gaume, L., McKey, D. and Anstett, M. C. (1997). Benefits conferred by “timid” ants: active anti-herbivore protection of the rainforest tree Leonardoxa africana by the minute ant Petalomyrmex phylax. Oecologia, 112, 209–16.Google Scholar

Gaume, L., McKey, D. and Terrin, S. (1998). Ant-plant-homopteran mutualism: how the third partner affects the interaction between a plant-specialist ant and its myrmecophyte host. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 265, 569–75.Google Scholar

Guimarães, P. R., Rico-Gray, V., dos Reis, S. F. and Thompson, J. N. (2006). Asymmetries in specialization in ant-plant mutualistic networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 2041–7.Google Scholar

Heil, M., Hilpert, A., Fiala, B. and Linsenmair, K. E. (2001). Nutrient availability and indirect (biotic) defence in a Malaysian ant-plant. Oecologia, 126, 404–8.Google Scholar

Ings, T. C., Montoya, J. M., Bascompte, J. et al. (2009). Ecological networks – beyond food webs. Journal of Animal Ecology, 78, 253–69.Google Scholar

Janzen, D. H. (1973). Dissolution of mutualism between Cecropia and its Azteca ants. Biotropica, 5, 15–28.Google Scholar

Janzen, D. H. (1974). The deflowering of Central America. Natural History, 83, 48.Google Scholar

Johnson, N. C. (2010). Resource stoichiometry elucidates the structure and function of arbuscular mycorrhizas across scales. New Phytologist, 185, 631–47. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03110.x.Google Scholar

Kautz, S., Lumbsch, H. T., Ward, P. S. and Heil, M. (2009). How to prevent cheating: a digestive specialization ties mutualistic plant-ants to their ant-plant partners. Evolution, 63, 839–53. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00594.x.Google Scholar

Kiers, E. T. and Denison, R. F. (2008). Sanctions, cooperation, and the stability of plant-rhizosphere mutualisms. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 39, 215–36. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173423.Google Scholar

Kiers, E. T., Palmer, T. M., Ives, A. R., Bruno, J. F. and Bronstein, J. L. (2010). Mutualisms in a changing world: an evolutionary perspective. Ecology Letters, 13, 1459–74. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01538.x.Google Scholar

Kokolo, B., Atteke, C., Ibrahim, B. and Blatrix, R. (2016). Pattern of specificity in the tripartite symbiosis between Barteria plants, ants and Chaetothyriales fungi. Symbiosis, 69, 169–74. doi:10.1007/s13199-016-0402-2.Google Scholar

Kuussaari, M., Bommarco, R., Heikkinen, R. K. et al. (2009). Extinction debt: a challenge for biodiversity conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24, 564–71.Google Scholar

Laurance, W. F., Camargo, J. L. C., Luizao, R. C. C. et al. (2011). The fate of Amazonian forest fragments: a 32-year investigation. Biological Conservation, 144, 56–67. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.09.021.Google Scholar

Léotard, G., Debout, G., Dalecky, A. et al. (2009). Range expansion drives dispersal evolution in an equatorial three-species symbiosis. Plos One, 4, e5377.Google Scholar

Leroy, C., Sejalon-Delmas, N., Jauneau, A. et al. (2011). Trophic mediation by a fungus in an ant-plant mutualism. Journal of Ecology, 99, 583–90. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01763.x.Google Scholar

Lindroth, R. L. (2010). Impacts of elevated atmospheric CO₂ and O₃ on forests: phytochemistry, trophic interactions, and ecosystem dynamics. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 36, 2–21.Google Scholar

Lortie, C. J. (2007). An ecological tardis: the implications of facilitation through evolutionary time. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 22, 627–30.Google Scholar

Marquis, M., Del Toro, I. and Pelini, S. L. (2014). Insect mutualisms buffer warming effects on multiple trophic levels. Ecology, 95, 9–13.Google Scholar

Maschwitz, U., Fiala, B., Dumpert, K., bin Hashim, R. and Sudhaus, W. (2016). Nematode associates and bacteria in ant-tree symbioses. Symbiosis, 69, 1–7. doi:10.1007/s13199-015-0367-6.Google Scholar

Mayer, V. E., Frederickson, M. E., McKey, D. and Blatrix, R. (2014). Current issues in the evolutionary ecology of ant-plant symbioses. New Phytologist, 202, 749–64. doi:10.1111/nph.12690.Google Scholar

McKey, D. (1974). Ant-plants: selective eating of an unoccupied Barteria by a Colobus monkey. Biotropica, 6, 269–70.Google Scholar

McKey, D., Gaume, L., Brouat, et al. (2005). The trophic structure of tropical ant-plant-herbivore interactions: community consequences and coevolutionary dynamics. In Biotic interactions in the tropics: Their role in the maintenance of species diversity, Burselm, D., Pinard, M., Hartley, S., eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 386–413.Google Scholar

Merilä, J. and Hendry, A. P. (2014). Climate change, adaptation, and phenotypic plasticity: the problem and the evidence. Evolutionary Applications, 7, 1–14.Google Scholar

Michelangeli, F. A. (2005). Tococa (Melastomataceae). New York: New York Botanical Garden Press.Google Scholar

Moraes, S. C. and Vasconcelos, H. L. (2009). Long-term persistence of a neotropical ant-plant population in the absence of obligate plant-ants. Ecology, 90, 2375–83.Google Scholar

Moran, N. A. and Baumann, P. (2000). Bacterial endosymbionts in animals. Current Opinion in Microbiology, 3, 270–5.Google Scholar

Niziolek, O. K., Berenbaum, M. R. and DeLucia, E. H. (2013). Impact of elevated CO₂ and increased temperature on Japanese beetle herbivory. Insect Science, 20, 513–23.Google Scholar

Orivel, J., Lambs, L., Malé, P. J. G., Leroy, C., Grangier, J., Otto, T., Quilichini, A. and Dejean, A. (2011). Dynamics of the association between a long-lived understory myrmecophyte and its specific associated ants. Oecologia, 165, 369–76.Google Scholar

Palmer, T. M., Stanton, M. L., Young, T. P. et al. (2008). Breakdown of an ant-plant mutualism follows the loss of large herbivores from an African savanna. Science, 319, 192–5.Google Scholar

Passmore, H. A., Bruna, E. M., Heredia, S. M. and Vasconcelos, H. L. (2012). Resilient networks of ant-plant mutualists in Amazonian forest fragments. Plos One, 7, e40803. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040803.Google Scholar

Peccoud, J., Piatscheck, F., Yockteng, R. et al. (2013). Multi-locus phylogenies of the genus Barteria (Passifloraceae) portray complex patterns in the evolution of myrmecophytism. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 66, 824–32.Google Scholar

Pellissier, L., Litsios, G., Fiedler, K. et al. (2012). Loss of interactions with ants under cold climate in a regional myrmecophilous butterfly fauna. Journal of Biogeography, 39, 1782–90.Google Scholar

Phillips, B. L., Brown, G. P., Webb, J. K. and Shine, R. (2006). Invasion and the evolution of speed in toads. Nature, 439, 803. doi:10.1038/439803a.Google Scholar

Pringle, E. G. (2016). Integrating plant carbon dynamics with mutualism ecology. New Phytologist, 210, 71–5.Google Scholar

Pringle, E. G., Akçay, E., Raab, T. K., Dirzo, R. and Gordon, D. M. (2013). Water stress strengthens mutualism among ants, trees and scale insects. PLoS Biology, 11, e1001705.Google Scholar

Putz, F. E. and Holbrook, N. M. (1988). Further observations on the dissolution of mutualism between Cecropia and its ants: the Malaysian case. Oikos, 53, 121–5. doi:10.2307/3565671.Google Scholar

Richardson, D. M., Allsopp, N., D’Antonio, C. M., Milton, S. J. and Rejmanek, M. (2000). Plant invasions – the role of mutualisms. Biological Reviews, 75, 65–93.Google Scholar

Rico-Gray, V. and Oliveira, P. S. (2007). The ecology and evolution of ant-plant interactions. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Robinson, E. A., Ryan, G. D. and Newman, J. A. (2012). A meta-analytical review of the effects of elevated CO₂ on plant–arthropod interactions highlights the importance of interacting environmental and biological variables. New Phytologist, 194, 321–36.Google Scholar

Russell, J. A., Moreau, C. S., Goldman-Huertas, B. et al. (2009). Bacterial gut symbionts are tightly linked with the evolution of herbivory in ants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 21236–41. doi:10.1073/pnas.0907926106.Google Scholar

Ryalls, J. M., Moore, B. D., Riegler, M. et al. (2016). Climate and atmospheric change impacts on sap-feeding herbivores: a mechanistic explanation based on functional groups of primary metabolites. Functional Ecology, 41, 161–171. doi:10.1111/1365–2435.12715.Google Scholar

Stiling, P. and Cornelissen, T. (2007). How does elevated carbon dioxide (CO₂) affect plant–herbivore interactions? A field experiment and meta-analysis of CO₂-mediated changes on plant chemistry and herbivore performance. Global Change Biology, 13, 1823–42.Google Scholar

Stuble, K. L., Pelini, S. L., Diamond, S. E. et al. (2013). Foraging by forest ants under experimental climatic warming: a test at two sites. Ecology and Evolution, 3, 482–91.Google Scholar

Sun, Y. C., Jing, B. B. and Ge, F. (2009). Response of amino acid changes in Aphis gossypii (Glover) to elevated CO₂ levels. Journal of Applied Entomology, 133, 189–97.Google Scholar

Sunday, J. M., Bates, A. E. and Dulvy, N. K. (2011). Global analysis of thermal tolerance and latitude in ectotherms. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 278, 1823–30.Google Scholar

Thomas, C. D., Bodsworth, E. J., Wilson, R. J. et al. (2001). Ecological and evolutionary processes at expanding range margins. Nature, 411, 577–81.Google Scholar

Thompson, J. A. (2005). The geographic mosaic of coevolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Tylianakis, J. M., Didham, R. K., Bascompte, J. and Wardle, D. A. (2008). Global change and species interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters, 11, 1351–63. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01250.x.Google Scholar

Valiente-Banuet, A., Rumebe, A. V., Verdú, M. and Callaway, R. M. (2006). Modern Quaternary plant lineages promote diversity through facilitation of ancient Tertiary lineages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 16812–7.Google Scholar

Vitousek, P. M., Aber, J. D., Howarth, R. W. et al. (1997). Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecological Applications, 7, 737–50. doi:10.2307/2269431.Google Scholar

Vitousek, P. M. and Walker, L. R. (1989). Biological invasion by Myrica faya in Hawai’i: plant demography, nitrogen fixation, ecosystem effects. Ecological Monographs, 59, 247–65.Google Scholar

Vittecoq, M., Djiéto-Lordon, C., McKey, D. and Blatrix, R. (2012). Range expansion induces variation in a behavioural trait in an ant-plant mutualism. Acta Oecologica, 38, 84–8.Google Scholar

Warbrick-Smith, J., Behmer, S. T., Lee, K. P., Raubenheimer, D. and Simpson, S. J. (2006). Evolving resistance to obesity in an insect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 14045–9.Google Scholar

Wernegreen, J. J. (2012). Mutualism meltdown in insects: bacteria constrain thermal adaptation. Current Opinion in Microbiology, 15, 255–62.Google Scholar

Wilf, P. and Labandeira, C. C. (1999). Response of plant-insect associations to Paleocene-Eocene warming. Science, 284, 2153–6.Google Scholar

Yu, D. W. and Pierce, N. E. (1998). A castration parasite of an ant-plant mutualism. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 265, 375–82.Google Scholar

Yu, D. W., Wilson, H. B., Frederickson, M. E. et al. (2004). Experimental demonstration of species coexistence enabled by dispersal limitation. Journal of Animal Ecology, 73, 1102–14.Google Scholar

Zhang, S., Zhang, Y. and Ma, K. (2012). The ecological effects of the ant–hemipteran mutualism: a meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Ecology, 13, 116–24.Google Scholar

Zvereva, E. L. and Kozlov, M. V. (2006). Consequences of simultaneous elevation of carbon dioxide and temperature for plant-herbivore interactions: a metaanalysis. Global Change Biology, 12, 27–41.Google Scholar