Costs of being a diet generalist for the protist predator Dictyostelium discoideum.

Consumers range from specialists that feed on few resources to generalists that feed on many. Generalism has the clear advantage of having more resources to exploit, but the costs that limit generalism are less clear. We explore two understudied costs of generalism in a generalist amoeba predator, Dictyostelium discoideum, feeding on naturally co-occurring bacterial prey. Both involve costs of combining prey that are suitable on their own. First, amoebas exhibit a reduction in growth rate when they switched to one species of prey bacteria from another compared to controls that experience only the second prey. The effect was consistent across all six tested species of bacteria. These switching costs typically disappear within a day, indicating adjustment to new prey bacteria. This suggests that these costs are physiological. Second, amoebas usually grow more slowly on mixtures of prey bacteria compared to the expectation based on their growth on single prey. There were clear mixing costs in three of the six tested prey mixtures, and none showed significant mixing benefits. These results support the idea that, although amoebas can consume a variety of prey, they must use partially different methods and thus must pay costs to handle multiple prey, either sequentially or simultaneously.

Desiccation Stress Acts as Cause as well as Cost of Dispersal in Drosophila melanogaster.

AbstractEnvironmental stress is one of the important causes of biological dispersal. At the same time, the process of dispersal itself can incur and/or increase susceptibility to stress for the dispersing individuals. Therefore, in principle, stress can serve as both a cause and a cost of dispersal. We studied these potentially contrasting roles of a key environmental stress (desiccation) using Drosophila melanogaster. By modulating water and rest availability, we asked whether (a) dispersers are individuals that are more susceptible to desiccation stress, (b) dispersers pay a cost in terms of reduced resistance to desiccation stress, (c) dispersal evolution alters the desiccation cost of dispersal, and (d) females pay a reproductive cost of dispersal. We found that desiccation was a clear cause of dispersal in both sexes, as both male and female dispersal propensity increased with increasing duration of desiccation. However, the desiccation cost of dispersal was male biased, a trend unaffected by dispersal evolution. Instead, females paid a fecundity cost of dispersal. We discuss the complex relationship between desiccation and dispersal, which can lead to both positive and negative associations. Furthermore, the sex differences highlighted here may translate into differences in movement patterns, thereby giving rise to sex-biased dispersal patterns.