Editing Zoothamnium niveum

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 154: Line 154:
 
Several characteristics of the present symbiosis may point to byproduct benefits, one provided by the symbiont to the host, the other provided by the host to the symbiont – at no costs. The leaking of fixed carbon from the symbiont cell initially appears costly. Nonetheless, these costs are not associated with symbiosis per se but with the inability of autotrophs to keep all the fixed carbon inside the cell, independent of a free-living or host-associated life style. Such costs can be allocated to the symbiosis only if they are enhanced and controlled by the host. Finally, we consider the provision of sulfide and oxygen for chemosynthesis as a byproduct benefit provided by the host through its contracting and expanding behavior as well as by its ciliary movement (Figure 11).
 
Several characteristics of the present symbiosis may point to byproduct benefits, one provided by the symbiont to the host, the other provided by the host to the symbiont – at no costs. The leaking of fixed carbon from the symbiont cell initially appears costly. Nonetheless, these costs are not associated with symbiosis per se but with the inability of autotrophs to keep all the fixed carbon inside the cell, independent of a free-living or host-associated life style. Such costs can be allocated to the symbiosis only if they are enhanced and controlled by the host. Finally, we consider the provision of sulfide and oxygen for chemosynthesis as a byproduct benefit provided by the host through its contracting and expanding behavior as well as by its ciliary movement (Figure 11).
  
[[File:Zoothamnium11of11.jpg|thumb|800px|center|FIGURE 11. Diagram of the putative byproduct mutualism. The host’s behaviors to contract and expand and the ciliary movement are self-serving acts to gain access to oxygen for respiration and for feeding, respectively. As a byproduct, sulfide and oxygen is provided to the symbiont. On the other hand, the symbiont fixes carbon as a self-serving act to grow and as a byproduct nourishes the host.]]
+
FIGURE 11
 +
 
 +
www.frontiersin.org
 +
 
 +
FIGURE 11. Diagram of the putative byproduct mutualism. The host’s behaviors to contract and expand and the ciliary movement are self-serving acts to gain access to oxygen for respiration and for feeding, respectively. As a byproduct, sulfide and oxygen is provided to the symbiont. On the other hand, the symbiont fixes carbon as a self-serving act to grow and as a byproduct nourishes the host.
  
 
Several mechanisms identified in evolutionary theory are crucial for the maintenance of mutualism: (1) partner choice, (2) partner sanctions, (3) and partner fidelity feedback (Bull and Rice, 1991; Noë and Hammerstein, 1994; Johnstone and Bshary, 2002; West et al., 2002a,b; Sachs et al., 2004; Weyl et al., 2010; Archetti et al., 2011). Their importance differs according to the mode of transmission (Ewald, 1987; Douglas, 2010; Sachs et al., 2011). In horizontal transmission, partner choice is crucial for the establishment, during which a cooperative symbiont is selected from the environment in advance of any possible exploitation (Bull and Rice, 1991). In contrast, during vertical transmission, the partner has already been chosen and is transferred to the next generation with high fidelity. Based on our current state of knowledge, this appears to be the case in the ''Z. niveum'' symbiosis.
 
Several mechanisms identified in evolutionary theory are crucial for the maintenance of mutualism: (1) partner choice, (2) partner sanctions, (3) and partner fidelity feedback (Bull and Rice, 1991; Noë and Hammerstein, 1994; Johnstone and Bshary, 2002; West et al., 2002a,b; Sachs et al., 2004; Weyl et al., 2010; Archetti et al., 2011). Their importance differs according to the mode of transmission (Ewald, 1987; Douglas, 2010; Sachs et al., 2011). In horizontal transmission, partner choice is crucial for the establishment, during which a cooperative symbiont is selected from the environment in advance of any possible exploitation (Bull and Rice, 1991). In contrast, during vertical transmission, the partner has already been chosen and is transferred to the next generation with high fidelity. Based on our current state of knowledge, this appears to be the case in the ''Z. niveum'' symbiosis.

Please note that all contributions to salvaEwiki are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (see SalvaEwiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)