Hubbry Logo
CommensalismCommensalismMain
Open search
Commensalism
Community hub
Commensalism
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Commensalism
Commensalism
Commensalism
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Remora are specially adapted to attach themselves to larger fish (or other animals, in this case a sea turtle) that provide locomotion and food.

Commensalism is a long-term biological interaction (symbiosis) in which members of one species gain benefits while those of the other species neither benefit nor are harmed.[1] This is in contrast with mutualism, in which both organisms benefit from each other; amensalism, where one is harmed while the other is unaffected; and parasitism, where one is harmed and the other benefits.

The commensal (the species that benefits from the association) may obtain nutrients, shelter, support, or locomotion from the host species, which is substantially unaffected. The commensal relation is often between a larger host and a smaller commensal; the host organism is unmodified, whereas the commensal species may show great structural adaptation consistent with its habits, as in the remoras that ride attached to sharks and other fishes. Remoras feed on their hosts' fecal matter,[2] while pilot fish feed on the leftovers of their hosts' meals. Numerous birds perch on bodies of large mammal herbivores or feed on the insects turned up by grazing mammals.[3]

Etymology

[edit]

The word "commensalism" is derived from the word "commensal", meaning "eating at the same table" in human social interaction, which in turn comes through French from the Medieval Latin commensalis, meaning "sharing a table", from the prefix com-, meaning "together", and mensa, meaning "table" or "meal".[4] Commensality, at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, refers to professors eating at the same table as students (as they live in the same "college").[citation needed]

The Belgian zoologist and paleontologist Pierre-Joseph van Beneden introduced the term "commensalism" in 1876.[5]

Examples of commensal relationships

[edit]
Domestic and feral pigeons (Columba livia domestica) are commensals, having lived alongside humans for thousands of years after being domesticated from the rock dove (Columba livia). Due to its range being expanded with human assistance, the pigeon has a cosmopolitan distribution.[6]

The commensal pathway was traversed by animals that fed on refuse around human habitats or by animals that preyed on other animals drawn to human camps. Those animals established a commensal relationship with humans in which the animals benefited but the humans received little benefit or harm. Those animals that were most capable of taking advantage of the resources associated with human camps would have been the 'tamer' individuals: less aggressive, with shorter fight-or-flight distances. Later, these animals developed closer social or economic bonds with humans and led to a domestic relationship.[7][8]

The leap from a synanthropic population to a domestic one could only have taken place after the animals had progressed from anthropophily to habituation to commensalism and partnership, at which point the establishment of a reciprocal relationship between animal and human would have laid the foundation for domestication, including captivity and then human-controlled breeding. From this perspective, animal domestication is a coevolutionary process in which a population responds to selective pressure while adapting to a novel niche that includes another species with evolving behaviors.[8]

Dogs and humans

[edit]

The dog was the first domesticated animal and was domesticated and widely established across Eurasia before the end of the Pleistocene, well before the cultivation of crops or the domestication of other animals.[9] The dog is often hypothesised to be a classic example of a domestic animal that likely traveled a commensal pathway into domestication. Archaeological evidence, such as the Bonn–Oberkassel dog dating to ~14,000 BP,[10] supports the hypothesis that dog domestication preceded the emergence of agriculture [11][12] and began close to the Last Glacial Maximum when hunter-gatherers preyed on megafauna.

The wolves more likely drawn to human camps were the less aggressive, subdominant pack members with lowered flight response, higher stress thresholds, and less wary around humans, and therefore better candidates for domestication.[7] Proto-dogs might have taken advantage of carcasses left on site by early hunters, assisted in capturing prey, or provided defense from large competing predators at kills.[12] However, the extent to which proto-domestic wolves could have become dependent on this way of life prior to domestication and without human provisioning is unclear and highly debated. In contrast, cats may have become fully dependent on a commensal lifestyle before being domesticated by preying on other commensal animals, such as rats and mice, without any human provisioning. The debate over the extent to which some wolves were commensal with humans before domestication stems from the debate over the level of human intentionality in domestication, which remains untested.[8][13]

The earliest sign of domestication in dogs was the neotenization (retaining juvenile features into adulthood) of skull morphology[14][15][7] and the shortening of snout length that results in tooth crowding, reduction in tooth size, and a reduction in the number of teeth,[16][7] which has been attributed to the strong selection for reduced aggression.[15][7] This process may have begun during the initial commensal stage of dog domestication, even before humans began to be active partners in the process.[7][8]

A mitochondrial, microsatellite, and Y-chromosome assessment of two wolf populations in North America combined with satellite telemetry data revealed significant genetic and morphological differences between one population that migrated with and preyed upon caribou and another territorial ecotype population that remained in a boreal coniferous forest. Although these two populations spend a period of the year in the same place, and though there was evidence of gene flow between them, the difference in prey-habitat specialization has been sufficient to maintain genetic and even coloration divergence.[17][8]

A different study has identified the remains of a population of extinct Pleistocene Beringian wolves with unique mitochondrial signatures. The skull shape, tooth wear, and isotopic signatures suggested these remains were derived from a population of specialist megafauna hunters and scavengers that became extinct while less specialized wolf ecotypes survived.[18][8] Analogous to the modern wolf ecotype that has evolved to track and prey upon caribou, a Pleistocene wolf population could have begun following mobile hunter-gatherers, thus slowly acquiring genetic and phenotypic differences that would have allowed them to adapt to the human habitat more successfully.[19][8]

Aspergillus and Staphylococcus

[edit]
See also: Aspergillus and Staphylococcus

Numerous genera of bacteria and fungi live on and in the human body as part of its natural flora. The fungal genus Aspergillus is capable of living under considerable environmental stress, and thus is capable of colonising the upper gastrointestinal tract where relatively few examples of the body's gut flora can survive due to highly acidic or alkaline conditions produced by gastric acid and digestive juices. While Aspergillus normally produces no symptoms, in individuals who are immunocompromised or suffering from existing conditions such as tuberculosis, a condition called aspergillosis can occur, in which populations of Aspergillus grow out of control.[citation needed]

Staphylococcus aureus, a common bacterial species, is known best for its numerous pathogenic strains that can cause numerous illnesses and conditions. However, many strains of S. aureus are metabiotic commensals, and are present on roughly 20 to 30% of the human population as part of the skin flora.[20] S. aureus also benefits from the variable ambient conditions created by the body's mucous membranes, and as such can be found in the oral and nasal cavities, as well as inside the ear canal. Other Staphylococcus species including S. warneri, S. lugdunensis and S. epidermidis, will also engage in commensalism for similar purposes.[citation needed]

Nitrosomonas spp and Nitrobacter spp

[edit]

Commensalistic relationships between microorganisms include situations in which the waste product of one microorganism is a substrate for another species. One good example is nitrification — the oxidation of ammonium ion to nitrate. Nitrification occurs in two steps: first, bacteria such as Nitrosomonas spp. and certain crenarchaeotes oxidize ammonium to nitrite; and second, nitrite is oxidized to nitrate by Nitrobacter spp. and similar bacteria. Nitrobacter spp. benefit from their association with Nitrosomonas spp. because they use nitrite to obtain energy for growth.[citation needed]

Commensalistic associations also occur when one microbial group modifies the environment to make it better suited for another organism. The synthesis of acidic waste products during fermentation stimulates the proliferation of more acid-tolerant microorganisms, which may be only a minor part of the microbial community at neutral pH. A good example is the succession of microorganisms during milk spoilage.[citation needed]

Biofilm formation provides another example. The colonization of a newly exposed surface by one type of microorganism (an initial colonizer) makes it possible for other microorganisms to attach to the microbially modified surface.[citation needed]

Octocorals and brittle stars

[edit]

In deep-sea, benthic environments there is an associative relationship between octocorals and brittle stars. Due to the currents flowing upward along seamount ridges, atop these ridges there are colonies of suspension feeding corals and sponges, and brittle stars that grip tight to them and get up off the sea floor. A specific documented commensal relationship is between the ophiuran Ophiocreas oedipus Lyman and the octocoral primnoid Metallogorgia melanotrichos.[citation needed]

Historically, commensalism has been recognized as the usual type of association between brittle stars and octocorals.[21] In this association, the ophiurans benefit directly by being elevated through facilitating their feeding by suspension, while the octocorals do not seem to benefit or be harmed by this relationship.[22]

Recent studies in the Gulf of Mexico have suggested that there are actually some benefits to the octocorals, such as receiving a cleaning action by the brittle star as it slowly moves around the coral.[23] In some cases, a close relationship occurs between cohabiting species, with the interaction beginning from their juvenile stages.[24]

Arguments

[edit]

Whether the relationship between humans and some types of gut flora is commensal or mutualistic is still unanswered.

Some biologists argue that any close interaction between two organisms is unlikely to be completely neutral for either party, and that relationships identified as commensal are likely mutualistic or parasitic in a subtle way that has not been detected. For example, epiphytes are "nutritional pirates" that may intercept substantial amounts of nutrients that would otherwise go to the host plant.[25] Large numbers of epiphytes can also cause tree limbs to break or shade the host plant and reduce its rate of photosynthesis. Similarly, phoretic mites may hinder their host by making flight more difficult, which may affect its aerial hunting ability or cause it to expend extra energy while carrying these passengers.[citation needed]

Types

[edit]
Phoretic mites on a fly (Pseudolynchia canariensis)

Like all ecological interactions, commensalisms vary in strength and duration from intimate, long-lived symbioses to brief, weak interactions through intermediaries.[citation needed]

Phoresy

[edit]

Phoresy is one animal attached to another exclusively for transport, mainly arthropods, examples of which are mites on insects (such as beetles, flies or bees), pseudoscorpions on mammals[26] or beetles, and millipedes on birds.[27] Phoresy can be either obligate or facultative (induced by environmental conditions).

Inquilinism

[edit]
Inquilinism: Tillandsia bourgaei growing on an oak tree in Mexico

Inquilinism is the use of a second organism for permanent housing. Examples are epiphytic plants (such as many orchids) that grow on trees,[28] or birds that live in holes in trees.

Metabiosis

[edit]

Metabiosis is a more indirect dependency, in which one organism creates or prepares a suitable environment for a second. Examples include maggots, which develop on and infest corpses, and hermit crabs, which use gastropod shells to protect their bodies.[citation needed]

Facilitation

[edit]

Facilitation or probiosis describes species interactions that benefit at least one of the participants and cause harm to neither.[citation needed]

Necromeny

[edit]

Necromeny is one animal associating with another until the latter dies, then the former feeds on the corpse of the latter. Examples include some nematodes[29] and some mites.[30][31]

See also

[edit]
  • Mutualism – where both organisms experience mutual benefit in the relationship
  • Parasitism – where one organism benefits at the expense of another organism.
  • Parabiosis – where both organisms occupy the same dwelling, but do not interfere with each other
  • Symbiosis – long-term interactions between different biological species, which can be mutualistic, commensal or parasitic
  • Synanthrope – species commensal with humans

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Commensalism

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Commensalism is a type of symbiotic relationship in characterized by a long-term interaction between two or more in which one benefits while the other experiences no net positive or negative effect. This interaction falls under the broader category of , where organisms live in close association, but commensalism specifically denotes a one-sided benefit without harm to the host . Commensalism plays a key role in and . Ecological models indicate that commensal interactions, as unilateral relationships, can enhance community stability more effectively than symmetrical reciprocal interactions like or mutualism, as they allow beneficiary species to thrive in niches provided by hosts. In anthropogenic environments, such as urban areas, commensalism is evident in relationships like pigeons scavenging human food waste, underscoring its adaptability and influence on human-altered ecosystems. While purely neutral effects are debated in nature—due to potential subtle influences—commensalism remains a foundational concept for understanding interspecies dynamics.

Definition and Fundamentals

Definition

Commensalism is a long-term between two species in which one species, known as the commensal, derives benefits while the other species, referred to as the host, experiences no net positive or negative effect on its fitness. This interaction is characterized by a unilateral advantage to the commensal without imposing costs or providing gains to the host. Within the broader framework of symbiosis, commensalism represents one of the three primary types of interspecies relationships, alongside mutualism—where both species benefit—and —where one benefits at the expense of the other. itself is defined as any close and prolonged ecological association between individuals of different , encompassing a of outcomes from beneficial to detrimental. Commensalism specifically highlights the neutral impact on the host, distinguishing it as a +/0 interaction in ecological terms. For an interaction to qualify as commensalism, the benefits to the commensal must be direct and tangible, such as access to or transportation, while the host's overall fitness—encompassing , , and resource acquisition—remains unaffected. This neutrality is a key prerequisite, ensuring that does not alter the host's ecological dynamics in measurable ways. Various forms of commensalism, such as phoresy, exist within this general framework.

Characteristics and Criteria

Commensalism is characterized by an interaction, often long-term, in which one , the commensal, derives benefits such as access to resources, , or transportation, while the host experiences no net change in its fitness, including , , or growth. The relationship is typically non-obligatory for the commensal, allowing it to persist independently but gaining advantages through the association, which distinguishes it as a form of rather than a transient encounter. These traits ensure the interaction aligns with the core definition of unilateral benefit without reciprocal costs or gains. Verifying commensalism requires demonstrating the absence of effects on the host, a challenging endeavor since proving no impact demands rigorous empirical testing to rule out subtle influences. Controlled experiments, such as removal or exclusion studies in microcosms or field settings, evaluate host fitness by measuring parameters like growth rates, reproductive output, and population dynamics before and after the commensal's presence or absence; no significant differences support the neutral outcome for the host. Ecologists also apply null models to simulate random assembly or interactions within communities, testing whether observed patterns deviate from expectations under neutrality, thereby assessing if the relationship truly lacks detectable effects on the host. However, measurement challenges persist, as the absence of observed effects does not conclusively prove complete neutrality, potentially overlooking context-dependent or long-term subtle impacts. Commensalism differs from amensalism, an interaction where one species is unaffected (0) while the other suffers harm (-), by the explicit lack of negative consequences to the host. In contrast to neutralism, which describes species coexisting without any direct interaction or influence (0/0), commensalism involves an active association that provides a benefit to one participant without altering the other's status. These distinctions highlight commensalism's role as a one-sided but interactive dynamic in ecological communities. Post-2020 advances in research have employed to detect and quantify subtle commensal effects at the molecular level, enhancing the precision of neutrality assessments through high-resolution community profiling and functional gene analysis.

Etymology and History

Etymology

The term "commensalism" derives from the Latin prefix "com-" meaning "together" or "with," combined with "mensa," meaning "table," evoking the image of sharing a at the same table where one participant benefits from the food without diminishing the host's portion. This linguistic root underscores the biological concept of a one-sided benefit in interspecies interactions, analogous to a guest dining without impacting the host. The term was coined in 1875 by the Belgian zoologist and paleontologist Pierre-Joseph van Beneden in his seminal work Les commensaux et les parasites dans le règne animal, where he classified non-harmful associations between species alongside . Van Beneden, a prominent figure in 19th-century , used "commensalism" to denote relationships in which one gains access to resources or from another without causing detriment, drawing from his extensive studies of animal interactions. Initially employed within to distinguish benign cohabitations from parasitic harm, the term evolved to highlight neutral or beneficial associations in broader ecological contexts, contrasting with "," which originates from "sym-" (together) and "biosis" (living), implying mutual or intimate . The related adjective "commensal," dating to the early in English, originally referred to a table companion or dinner guest, later adapted to describe organisms in such relationships.

Historical Recognition

The concept of commensalism emerged in the through observations by naturalists studying , where Belgian zoologist Pierre-Joseph van Beneden distinguished commensal associations from parasitic ones by noting that commensals benefited from hosts without causing harm, as detailed in his 1875 work Les commensaux et les parasites dans le règne animal. Van Beneden's analyses of epizoic organisms on whales and other sea life highlighted these one-sided benefits, laying the groundwork for recognizing non-harmful interspecies dependencies in ecological contexts. A key milestone came in 1879 when German botanist Heinrich Anton de Bary incorporated commensalism into his foundational definition of symbiosis as "the living together of unlike organisms," encompassing mutualism, parasitism, and commensalism as varied outcomes of close associations. In the 20th century, ecologists like Charles Elton refined these ideas within community ecology, integrating commensalism into broader frameworks of trophic interactions and food webs in his 1927 book Animal Ecology, which emphasized how such relationships contribute to community structure without altering population dynamics dramatically. Early understandings of commensalism were largely descriptive, appearing in limnology texts that cataloged associations in freshwater ecosystems based on observational data rather than mechanistic tests. This shifted in the mid-20th century toward experimental validation, with studies employing controlled observations and manipulations to confirm the neutral impact on hosts, as seen in ecological experiments on intertidal and communities. Prior to 2020, research on commensalism exhibited significant gaps in microbial systems, where interactions were often overlooked due to cultivation biases and limited tools for detecting subtle benefits; advances in , such as metagenomic sequencing, began addressing this by revealing hidden commensal networks in microbiomes around the early .

Types of Commensalism

Phoresy

Phoresy represents a specific type of commensalism characterized by the temporary attachment of one , known as the phoront or phoretic, to another more mobile , the host or carrier, for the purpose of dispersal to new habitats or resources. In this interaction, the phoront gains mobility and access to distant locations without providing any reciprocal benefit to the host, while the host experiences neither advantage nor disadvantage. This form of is distinctly unilateral, aligning with broader commensal principles where one partner benefits from enhanced transport capabilities. The mechanisms underlying phoresy primarily involve physical , where the phoront secures itself to the host's or body surface using specialized morphological adaptations or secretions. Common attachment methods include hooks, claws, or adhesive secretions that ensure stability during movement, often without penetrating the host's tissues. These interactions are typically short-term, lasting only as long as necessary for relocation, and are most prevalent among arthropods such as mites and , where the phoront detaches upon reaching a suitable destination. Ecologically, phoresy plays a crucial role in facilitating dispersal for organisms with limited independent mobility, particularly in fragmented or discrete habitats where active movement is challenging. By leveraging the host's locomotion, phoronts can bypass barriers like unsuitable terrain or isolation, thereby maintaining and colonizing new patches. This behavior is especially adaptive in communities, where it enhances survival and distribution in heterogeneous environments without altering the host's or reproductive patterns. To qualify as phoresy, the interaction must involve no exchange of nutrients or resources between partners, with the phoront deriving solely benefits and the host remaining unaffected in terms of expenditure or fitness. Verification of this commensal nature typically relies on controlled experiments, such as removing phoronts from hosts and observing no significant changes in host , , or , confirming the absence of or mutualistic elements. Such criteria distinguish phoresy from parasitic or mutualistic associations, emphasizing its role as a neutral dispersal strategy.

Inquilinism

Inquilinism represents a specific subtype of commensalism wherein one , known as the inquiline, resides within the , nest, , or of another , termed the host, deriving protection or benefits without imposing any cost on the host. This arrangement allows the inquiline to exploit pre-existing structures for long-term habitation, ensuring its survival in environments where independent construction would be challenging or impossible. The term originates from the Latin inquilinus, meaning "tenant" or "lodger," emphasizing the non-intrusive, co-occupancy nature of the relationship. The primary mechanisms underlying inquilinism involve the opportunistic use of unoccupied or underutilized spaces in the host's abode, such as empty chambers in burrows or external surfaces on the host's body, without engaging in or direct physiological interaction. This passive exploitation ensures that the inquiline neither consumes the host's food nor alters its habitat in a way that reduces the host's fitness, maintaining a neutral impact overall. Unlike temporary associations like phoresy, which facilitate short-term dispersal, inquilinism is characterized by stable, residential occupancy. Ecologically, inquilinism plays a key role in providing refugia for the inquiline against predation, , or other abiotic stresses in harsh or competitive environments, thereby enhancing in shared habitats. It is particularly prevalent among sessile organisms, such as certain attached to larger hosts, and burrowing species that leverage existing excavations for safety. This form of interaction supports stability by allowing multiple to coexist within limited spatial resources without escalating interspecific conflict. Inquilinism is distinctly differentiated from , as the inquiline causes no tissue damage, depletion, or other harm to the host, avoiding any exploitative drain on its resources. In contrast to mutualism, it lacks any reciprocal benefits to the host, such as improved defense or provision, rendering the relationship unilaterally advantageous. These boundaries underscore inquilinism's position as a benign, habitat-focused within the broader spectrum of interspecies interactions.

Metabiosis

Metabiosis is a subtype of commensalism in which one , the commensal, benefits from the use of durable structures or habitats abandoned by another , the host, after the host has vacated or died, with no direct interaction between the two during the host's active period. This form of interaction emphasizes a temporal separation, where the commensal exploits remnants such as empty shells, nests, or burrows that persist post-occupancy, providing , , or a suitable microhabitat without requiring the host's presence. The term originates from "meta" (after) and "biosis" (living), highlighting the sequential nature of the dependency. The mechanisms of metabiosis involve passive scavenging of these abandoned structures, where the commensal locates and occupies them independently, incurring no energy cost to the host since the benefit occurs solely after departure. Unlike contemporaneous associations, there is no physical contact or behavioral influence on the living host, ensuring the relationship remains one-sided in favor of the commensal. This relies on the of the host's creations, which withstand or degradation long enough for reuse, facilitating opportunistic in various ecosystems. Ecologically, metabiosis contributes to resource recycling by repurposing host-generated materials, thereby minimizing waste and enhancing availability for secondary users, which supports and succession dynamics. It functions as a form of indirect , where the host's activities inadvertently prepare environments for subsequent occupants, promoting efficient nutrient cycling and structural continuity in communities. Key criteria for identifying metabiosis include the complete absence of host-commensal interaction during the host's life, negligible or zero impact on host fitness, and the commensal's sole benefit deriving from post-abandonment exploitation; however, the delayed timing often sparks over whether it qualifies as a strict symbiotic commensalism, as opposed to mere habitat succession. It differs from necromeny, which entails direct use of the host's corpse rather than abandoned living structures.

Facilitation

Facilitation represents a form of commensalism in which one species, the host or facilitator, indirectly benefits another, the commensal or beneficiary, by altering the local environment to improve resource access or habitat suitability, without experiencing any reciprocal gain or detriment. This interaction is characterized by the facilitator's neutral impact on its own fitness while enabling the commensal to exploit otherwise inaccessible opportunities, such as reduced competition or ameliorated abiotic stress. Unlike mutualism, facilitation in this context lacks bidirectional benefits, positioning it firmly within commensal dynamics where the host remains unaffected. The primary mechanisms of facilitation involve habitat engineering or disturbance creation, where the host modifies biotic or abiotic conditions to favor the commensal. For instance, in plant-animal systems, mammals like or can trample and expose , creating disturbed patches that allow subordinate to germinate and establish without direct from dominant . Similarly, certain trees may engineer microhabitats by providing shade or stabilizing , indirectly enabling understory or associated animals to thrive in stressful environments like arid regions. These processes often occur through passive environmental changes rather than active behaviors, emphasizing the indirect nature of the benefit in commensal facilitation. Ecologically, facilitation plays a crucial role in enhancing community biodiversity by promoting species coexistence and enabling the persistence of less competitive or stress-intolerant taxa. It contributes to higher local diversity in heterogeneous or harsh environments, where facilitators act as "nurses" to buffer extreme conditions, thereby supporting greater overall . In succession models, facilitation drives community assembly by allowing early-successional species to pave the way for later ones through cumulative environmental modifications, accelerating transitions from bare substrates to mature ecosystems. This dynamic is particularly evident in stressed habitats, where facilitation can outweigh competitive interactions, fostering resilience and stability. Recognition of facilitation as a distinct commensal process has grown significantly since the early 2000s, with post-2010 research elevating its status in community ecology beyond traditional mutualistic frameworks. Seminal works have highlighted its ubiquity across ecosystems, integrating it into broader theories of species interactions and emphasizing its overlooked prevalence due to historical focus on negative interactions like competition. Recent studies, including meta-analyses, have quantified its biodiversity impacts, showing facilitation to be a pervasive driver in diverse biomes and underscoring its implications for conservation and restoration efforts.

Necromeny

Necromeny is a specialized form of commensalism primarily observed in s, in which the commensal organism enters a living host but remains dormant until the host's , subsequently feeding on the decomposing corpse without having harmed the host during its lifetime. This interaction allows the nematode to exploit the nutrient-rich environment created by microbial in the , providing essential resources for growth and while the deceased host experiences no further impact. The mechanism typically begins with phoresy, where dauer larvae of nematodes attach to or are ingested by a mobile host, such as an , for dispersal to new habitats; once inside, the larvae enter a quiescent state and await the host's natural death. Upon mortality, the nematodes activate, feeding on and fungi that colonize the decaying tissues, often in oxygen-poor conditions that favor their survival. This process is particularly common in bacterivorous nematodes like those in the genus Caenorhabditis, where it serves as an efficient strategy for accessing protected, microbially abundant food sources. Ecologically, necromeny accelerates the decomposition of animal remains, enhancing nutrient cycling in soils and contributing to the breakdown of into forms usable by and other organisms. It represents an adaptive commensal strategy that minimizes energy expenditure for the nematode while positioning it in ephemeral, high-nutrient niches, and it may act as a precursor to more aggressive associations like in evolutionary terms. A representative example is the necromenic relationship between Caenorhabditis briggsae and scarab beetles, where nematodes proliferate within the beetle carcass post-death, utilizing bacterial blooms for sustenance. This differs from metabiosis by directly involving the host's body rather than merely its abandoned remnants.

Examples of Commensal Relationships

Terrestrial and Human-Associated Examples

One classic example of commensalism involves the relationship between domesticated dogs (Canis familiaris) and s, where ancestral wolves likely began scavenging and settlements for and without significantly affecting early populations. This interaction, initially commensal, evolved into mutualism through , though it remains a debated case in ecological literature due to the bidirectional benefits that emerged over time. In urban environments, rock pigeons (Columba livia) exemplify commensalism by exploiting -generated food waste and structures for nesting and roosting, gaining resources while imposing no notable harm on populations. Recent research from the 2020s highlights how pigeons thrive in cities due to continuous habitat connectivity and anthropogenic food sources, with genetic studies showing widespread dispersal facilitated by infrastructure. These adaptations underscore pigeons' status as a successful commensal, breeding year-round in response to stable urban resources. Among plants, epiphytes such as orchids and bromeliads demonstrate inquilinism, a form of commensalism, by growing on the trunks and branches of trees for physical support and elevated access to and air, without competing for the host's nutrients or via roots. The host trees experience no detriment, as epiphytes derive moisture and nutrients from atmospheric sources, allowing coexistence in forest canopies.

Marine Examples

In marine environments, a prominent example of inquilinism involves brittle stars (Ophiuroidea) associating with octocorals, such as those in the genus Metallogorgia. Brittle stars perch on the branched structures of these deep-sea corals, using them as elevated platforms to extend their arms for filter-feeding on without significantly impacting the host's growth or health. This relationship benefits the brittle stars by providing access to food-rich currents in the , while the octocorals experience no measurable harm, as observed in seamount ecosystems. Another classic illustration of commensalism in oceanic settings is the interaction between remoras (Echeneis spp.) and sharks (e.g., Carcharhinus species). Remoras attach to sharks via a specialized dorsal fin suction disc, gaining transportation across vast distances and access to food scraps from the shark's meals, as well as opportunities to feed on external parasites. This phoretic and facilitative association allows remoras to exploit the shark's mobility without affecting the host's foraging efficiency or causing injury, though some studies note occasional minor skin irritation that does not alter overall fitness. The dynamic ranges from purely commensal to weakly mutualistic depending on parasite removal benefits, but it predominantly favors the remora. Barnacles attaching to whales illustrate phoresy, where the barnacles benefit from transportation across oceans to access nutrient-rich waters for feeding, while the whale's mobility remains largely unimpaired by the attachment. This relationship, observed in species like gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus), positions the whale as a passive dispersal host without evidence of significant energy costs or harm from the encrusting barnacles. The relationship between clownfish (Amphiprion spp.) and sea anemones (Actiniaria) represents a debated boundary case in commensalism within ecosystems. Clownfish reside among the anemone's tentacles, which provide protection from predators due to the host's stinging cells that do not harm the fish owing to the clownfish's coating. While the anemone gains limited benefits like minor aeration of its tentacles or defense against , the interaction is primarily classified as mutualism, though early observations sometimes framed it as commensal when anemone advantages were overlooked. Recent research in the 2020s has highlighted bacterial commensals within ocean microbiomes associated with macroalgae, such as (Laminariales). These , including genera like Pseudoalteromonas, colonize algal surfaces to access nutrients from host exudates without impairing algal growth or , aiding microbial dispersal via algal drift. Studies from coastal and open-ocean systems demonstrate how these associations enhance bacterial survival in nutrient-variable waters while maintaining algal stability under stressors.

Microbial Examples

In microbial environments such as and host-associated niches, the Aspergillus spp. and the bacterium Staphylococcus spp. demonstrate a commensal interaction classified as facilitation. Aspergillus gains nutritional advantages from bacterial byproducts, including siderophores and metabolic intermediates that enhance iron availability and fungal , while Staphylococcus experiences no detriment. This coexistence is prevalent in polymicrobial biofilms, where fungal growth is supported without reciprocal benefit or harm to the bacterium. A prominent example of sequential commensalism occurs during in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, involving the bacteria spp. and spp. oxidizes to as part of the , supplying the essential substrate that enables to further oxidize to for energy generation. This metabiosis-like relationship benefits by providing a reliable nutrient source, with no evident negative impact on , underscoring the interdependence in microbial nutrient processing. Within the human gut microbiome, species of the genus , including B. thetaiotaomicron and B. fragilis, exemplify that thrive on host-derived dietary without causing harm. These anaerobes break down complex glycans unavailable to the host, deriving energy and promoting their persistence in the colonic environment, while maintaining neutrality by not disrupting host under typical conditions. from the has reinforced this dynamic, revealing Bacteroides contributions to microbial community stability and indirect host benefits like resistance, though their core interaction remains one-sided in favor of the bacteria. In the plant , non-pathogenic fungi such as certain saprotrophic and endophytic engage in commensal associations, utilizing root exudates for colonization and growth without infecting or damaging the host plant. These fungi indirectly facilitate nutrient access by decomposing , solubilizing phosphates, and enhancing mineral bioavailability in the , thereby enriching the nutrient pool available to plant . This neutral interaction highlights the role of fungal decomposers in sustaining ecosystems.

Debates and Challenges

Difficulty in Verification

Verifying true commensalism presents significant scientific challenges, primarily because demonstrating a complete absence of net effect on the host species is empirically elusive. The core difficulty lies in proving "no net effect," as small, context-dependent costs or benefits may exist but remain undetected due to observational limitations or the subtlety of interactions; the absence of observed impact does not conclusively prove neutrality, a principle emphasized in discussions of symbiotic classifications. This issue is compounded by the inherent variability in ecological contexts, where interactions can shift along a continuum from commensalism to mutualism or without clear boundaries. Methodological hurdles further impede verification, as long-term field studies—essential for capturing dynamic effects over time—are rare due to logistical constraints, limitations, and the complexity of natural environments. Laboratory approximations often fail to replicate these contexts, potentially overlooking indirect or delayed impacts on host fitness. Additionally, reliance on short-term observations or controlled experiments can misrepresent neutrality, as they rarely account for environmental fluctuations that might reveal hidden costs or benefits. Common pitfalls in classification include the frequent reclassification of presumed commensal relationships upon closer , often to weak mutualisms when subtle benefits to the host are identified. Statistical thresholds for neutrality, such as null models testing for significant deviations in fitness metrics, are employed to infer no effect, but these can be arbitrary and sensitive to sample size or data variability, risking false positives for commensalism. This underscores the need for rigorous, multi-method approaches to avoid over-simplification. Emerging genomic tools offer promise for overcoming some verification challenges by enabling detection of subtle molecular interactions that indicate non-neutrality. Techniques like metagenomic sequencing can reveal host gene expression changes or microbial influences on host physiology, providing evidence of undetected costs or benefits in microbial commensalisms. However, their application remains limited in non-microbial systems, where integration with field data is still developing.

Ecological and Evolutionary Implications

Commensal interactions contribute to stability by promoting persistence in complex food webs, often outperforming symmetric interactions like or mutualism in maintaining structure. Theoretical models demonstrate that commensalism enhances dynamical stability through asymmetric benefits, where the beneficiary gains without imposing costs on the provider, thereby reducing the risk of collapses in large networks. This stabilizing effect is particularly evident in microbial , where by-product-driven commensalism supports high even with limited resources, fostering reproducibility and resilience across stochastic assemblies. Furthermore, commensalism bolsters overall by facilitating niche partitioning and reducing competitive exclusion, as seen in symbiotic networks where such interactions amplify functions without destabilizing core dynamics. In the context of global , commensal relationships play a key role in facilitating invasions, especially under warming scenarios post-2020. Climate-induced shifts alter interaction strengths, allowing commensals to exploit novel opportunities for range expansion, such as enhanced dispersal in plant-animal networks where one partner's mobility benefits the other without reciprocal costs. These dynamics highlight commensalism's role in accelerating biotic homogenization, though probabilistic assessments are necessary given verification challenges in field settings. Evolutionarily, commensal relationships represent transitional states along the symbiosis continuum, capable of shifting toward mutualism or based on selective pressures and genetic mechanisms. In microbial systems, rapid evolution drives these transitions, with symbionts moving from neutral commensalism to beneficial mutualism via host-mediated benefits or to exploitative through virulence enhancements, often within generations. (HGT) underpins these changes by enabling rapid acquisition of adaptive traits, such as metabolic capabilities, in commensal within host microbiomes, thereby accelerating dependency evolution and specialization. Seminal work shows that such genomic exchanges stabilize plasmid-host associations across the continuum, promoting long-term persistence while allowing flexibility in interaction outcomes. From a perspective, urban commensals serve as valuable models for , illustrating adaptive in anthropogenic landscapes. Species like or that thrive on exhibit genetic differentiation and rapid trait , providing insights into resilience strategies for preservation amid . These commensals highlight how conditional interactions—predominantly neutral under conditions but shifting with environmental stressors—underscore the rarity of "true" commensalism, implying most relationships are context-dependent and warrant integrated management approaches. Debates on verification difficulties further emphasize that evolutionary implications must account for probabilistic shifts, informing conservation efforts to mitigate urban impacts on global diversity.

References

  1. https://oertx.highered.texas.gov/courseware/lesson/1852/overview
  2. https://groups.molbiosci.northwestern.edu/holmgren/Glossary/Definitions/Def-C/commensalism.html
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4942820/
  4. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/handle/1813/60427/An_Ecological_and_Evolutionary_Framework_for_Commensalism_in_Anthropogenic_Environments.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  5. https://commons.clarku.edu/faculty_biology/345/
  6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/commensalism
  7. https://experts.arizona.edu/en/publications/our-current-understanding-of-commensalism
  8. https://journals.biologists.com/bio/article/7/2/bio032524/2003/Symbiosis-in-the-microbial-world-from-ecology-to
  9. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/ecology-and-evolution/articles/10.3389/fevo.2021.739047/full
  10. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/plants-and-vegetation/positive-interactions-mutualism-commensalism-and-symbiosis/9A1C79EC7B0632D627FEA3E005902AAB
  11. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/phoresy
  12. https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/direct-and-indirect-interactions-15650000/
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0031018211000162
  14. https://www.nature.com/articles/s12276-024-01262-7
  15. https://www.etymonline.com/word/commensalism
  16. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/commensalism
  17. https://www.thoughtco.com/commensalism-definition-and-examples-4114713
  18. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Pierre-Joseph-van-Beneden
  19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24908786/
  20. https://www.biologyonline.com/dictionary/commensalism
  21. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/0012-9623-95.1.59
  22. https://theses.hal.science/tel-01063917/file/TH2014_Poreau_Brice.pdf
  23. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/symbiosis
  24. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/0012-9623-96.1.80
  25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281184601_Biology_and_complexity_history_and_models_of_commensalism
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10653818/
  27. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00386-x
  28. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1711376
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4933732/
  30. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24750263.2023.2288847
  31. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/brv.12654
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352249625000059
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/phoresy
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6342123/
  35. https://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/gtr/gtr_srs140/gtr_srs140_161.pdf
  36. https://microbenotes.com/commensalism/
  37. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-91810-2
  38. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00227-007-0636-x
  39. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4606283
  40. https://www.biologyonline.com/dictionary/metabiosis
  41. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S092913939900030X
  42. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303252005_Commensalism_Amensalism_and_Synnecrosis
  43. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2745.14189
  44. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169534702000459
  45. https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.12478
  46. https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/51/3/235/256224
  47. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK19723/
  48. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/nematode
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10862191/
  50. https://sites.psu.edu/ecologistsnotebook/2021/03/04/signs-of-spring-1-where-did-dogs-come-from/
  51. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8083978/
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6183452/
  53. https://commons.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1891&context=facultyworks
  54. https://animalstudies.msu.edu/ASBibliography/oconnor2013.php
  55. https://www.bio.fsu.edu/~outlaw/shared/Plant_Bio_CDs/B--Laboratory/Manual/11--Symbiosis.doc
  56. http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/bio373/chapters/Chapter11/Chapter_11.pdf
  57. https://ocean.si.edu/ecosystems/deep-sea/brittle-stars-and-their-best-friends-octocorals
  58. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7109145/
  59. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/1516/
  60. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jfb.15759
  61. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8295263/
  62. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379838268_The_multidimensional_spectrum_of_eco-evolutionary_relationships_between_sharks_and_remoras
  63. https://www.nps.gov/pore/learn/nature/gray_whales.htm
  64. https://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/FNR/FNR-578-W.pdf
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9782873/
  66. https://bmcecolevol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-12-212
  67. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.575228/full
  68. https://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/13/6/829
  69. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11136935/
  70. https://academic.oup.com/femsre/article/42/3/335/4875924
  71. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/8/2/70
  72. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8229319/
  73. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245299052_Nitrosomonas_and_Nitrobacter_Interactions_in_Biological_Nitrification
  74. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7872030/
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10942478/
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12565245/
  77. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43621-025-01469-2
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5774629/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.