Summary
The distributions of five Drosophila species and four components of the microflora have been compared across a total of 48 traps baited with four different fruit and vegetable substrates in two domestic compost heaps in Canberra (Australia). Large and consistent differences are found, both among the Drosophila and among the microbial classes, in their distributions across traps baited with different substrates. Moreover the distribution of each Drosophila species shows a unique set of strong associations with the microbial distributions. Thus the distributions of both D. simulans and D. melanogaster are found to be strongly negatively correlated with the abundance of bacteria while D. simulans is also strongly positively correlated with the titre of fermenter yeasts. D. immigrans is strongly positively correlated both with bacteria and with non-fermenter yeasts. D. hydei is positively correlated with nonfermentery yeasts and D. busckii is negatively correlated with fermenter yeasts. Moulds are the only microbial class not consistently associated with the distribution of any of the Drosophila species. The correlations with the other microbial classes are sufficient to explain the majority of the abundance differences of the Drosophila species among the trap types. It is therefore proposed that the clear partitioning of the fruit resources by the Drosophila is due to their differing primary interactions with the microflora.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aaronson S (1970) Experimental microbial ecology. Academic Press. New York, 236 pp
Atkinson W, Shorrocks B (1977) Breeding site specificity in the domestic species of Drosophila. Oecologia 29:223–232
Barker JSF, Starmer WT (eds) (1982) Ecological genetics and evolution: The cactus-yeast-Drosophila model system. Academic Press, New York, 362 pp
Begon M (1982) Yeasts and Drosophila. In: Ashburner M, Carson HL, Thompson JN Jr (eds) The genetics and biology of Drosophila, vol 3 b. Academic Press, New York, pp 345–384
Begon M, Shorrocks B (1978) The feeding and breeding sites of Drosophila abscura Fallen and D. subobscura Collin. J Nat Hist 12:137–151
Bock IR (1976) Drosophilidae of Australia. I. Drosophila (Insecta: Diptera). Aut J Zool Suppl Ser No 40
Brock TD (1966) Principles of microbial ecology. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 306 pp
Carson HL (1971) The ecology of Drosophila breeding sites. HL Lyon Arboretum Lecture No. 2. University of Hawaii
Colless DR, McAlpine DK (1970) Diptera. In: CSIRO (ed) The insects of Australia, Chapt 34. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne, pp 656–740
Daggard GE (1981) Alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde oxidase and alcohol utilisation in Drosophila melanogaster, D. simulans, D. immigrans and D. busckii. In: Gibson JB, Oakeshott JG (eds) Genetic studies of Drosophila populations. Australian National University, Canberra, pp 59–75
Dobzhansky Th, Cooper DM, Phaff HJ, Knapp ED, Carson HL (1956) Studies on the ecology of Drosophila in the Yosemite region of California. IV. Differential attraction of species of Drosophila to different species of yeasts. Ecology 37:544–550
Erk FC, Sang JH (1966) The comparative nutritional requirements of two sibling species Drosophila simulans and D. melanogaster. J Insect Physiol 12:43–51
Fogleman JC (1982) The role of volatiles in the ecology of Drosophila. In: Barker JSF, Starmer WT (eds) Ecological genetics and evolution: the cactus-yeast-Drosophila model system. Academic Press, New York, pp 191–206
Fogleman JC, Hackbarth KR, Heed WB (1981a) Behavioural differentiation between two species of cactophilic Drosophila. III. Oviposition site preference. Am Nat 118:541–548
Fogleman JC, Starmer WT, Heed WB (1981b) Larval selectivity for yeast species by Drosophila mojavensis in natural substrates. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78:4435–4439
Fogleman JC, Starmer WT, Heed WB (1982) Comparisons of yeast florae from natural substrates and larval guts of southwestern Drosophila. Oecologia 52:187–191
Gibson JB, May TW, Wilks AV (1981) Genetic variation at the alcohol dehydrogenase locus in Drosophila melanogaster in relation to environmental variation. I. Ethanol levels in breeding sites and allozyme frequencies. Oecologia 51:191–198
Holmes RS, Moxon LN, Parsons PA (1980) Genetic variability of alcohol dehydrogenase among Australian Drosophila species: correlation of ADH biochemical phenotype with ethanol resource utilisation. J Exp Zool 214:199–204
Kimura MT (1980) Evolution of food preferences in fungus-feeding Drosophila: an ecological study. Evolution 34:1009–1018
Lewis N, Gibson JB (1978) Variation in the amount of enzyme protein in natural populations. Biochem Genet 16:159–170
May RM, MacArthur RH (1972) Niche overlap as a function of environmental variability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 69:1109–1113
Monick JA (1968) Alcohols: their chemistry, properties and manufacture. Reinhold New York, 594 pp
Nursten HE (1970) Volatile compounds: the aroma of fruits. In: Hulme AC (ed) The biochemistry of fruits and their prodccts, vol 1. Academic Press, New York, pp 239–268
Oakeshott JG, May TW, Gibson JB, Willcocks DA (1982) Resource partitioning in five domestic Drosophila species and its relationship to ethanol metabolism. Aust J Zool 30:547–556
Parsons PA (1983) The evolutionary biology of colonising species. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 262
Pianka RR (1976) Competition and niche theory. In: May RM (ed) Theoretical ecology Blackwell, Oxford, p 114–141
Riek EF (1970) Hymenoptera. In: CSIRO (ed) The insects of Australia, Chapt 37. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne, pp 867–959
Royes WV, Robertson FW (1964) The nutritional requirements and growth relations of different species of Drosophila. J Exp Zool 156:105–136
Sang JH (1956) The quantitative nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 33:45–72
Sang JH (1959) Circumstances affecting the nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. Ann NY Acad Sci 77:352–365
Sang JH (1978) The nutritional requirements of Drosophila. In: Ashburner M, Wright TRF (eds) The genetics and biology of Drosophila, vol 2. Academic Press, New York, pp 159–192
Starmer WT (1982) Associations and interactions among yeasts, Drosophila and their habitats. In: Barker JSF, Starmer WT (eds) Ecological genetics and evolution: the cactus-yeast-Drosophila model system. Academic Press, New York, pp 159–174
Starmer WT, Barker JSF (1986) Ecological genetics of the Adh-1 locus of Drosophila buzzatii. Biol J Linn Soc 28:373–385
Starmer WT, Barker JSF, Phaff HJ, Fogleman JC (1986) Adaptations of Drosophila and yeasts: their interactions with the volatile 2-propanol in the cactus-microorganism-Drosophila model system. Aust J Biol Sci 39:69–77
Starmer WT, Fogleman JC (1986) Coadaptation of Drosophila and yeasts in their natural habitat. J Chem Ecol 12:1037–1055
Starmer WT, Heed WB, Miranda M, Miller MW, Phaff HJ (1976) The ecology of yeast flora associated with cactophilic Drosophila and their host plants in the Sonoran Desert. Microbiol Ecol 3:11–30
Starmer WT, Phaff HJ, Miranda M, Miller MW, Heed WB (1982) The yeast flora associated with the decaying stems of columnar cacti and Drosophila in North America. Evol Biol 14:269–295
Vacek DC (1982) Interactions between microorganisms and cactophilic Drosophila of Australia. In: Barker JSF, Starmer WT (eds) Ecological genetics and evolution: the cactus-yeast-Drosophila model system. Academic Press. New York, pp 175–190
Vacek DC, Starmer WT, Heed WB (1979) Relevance of the ecology of citrus yeasts to the diet of Drosophila. Microbiol Ecol 5:43–49
Van der Walt JP (1970) Criteria and methods used in classification. In: Lodder J (ed) The yeasts, a taxonomic study. North Holland. Amsterdam, pp 34–113
Wagner RP (1944) The nutrition of Drosophila mulleri and D. aldrichi; growth of the larvae on cactus extract and the microorganisms found in cactus. Univ Texas Publ 4445:104–128
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Oakeshott, J.G., Vacek, D.C. & Anderson, P.R. Effects of microbial floras on the distributions of five domestic Drosophila species across fruit resources. Oecologia 78, 533–541 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378745
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378745