Are myrmecophytes always better protected against herbivores than other plants?

The present field study compared the degree of defoliation of three Guianian melastome, two myrmecophytes (i.e. plants sheltering ants in hollow structures) and Clidemia sp., a nonmyrmecophytic plant serving as a control. Maieta guianensis Aubl. hosted mostly Pheidole minutula Mayr whatever the area, whereas Tococa guianensis Aubl. hosted mostly Azteca bequaerti Wheeler along streams and Crematogaster laevis Mayr or Azteca sp. 1 in the understory where it never blossomed. Only Tococa, when sheltering A. bequaerti in what can be considered as a truly mutualistic relationship, showed significantly less defoliation than control plants. In the other associations, the difference was not significant, but P. minutula is mutualistic with Maieta because it furnishes some protection (exclusion experiments) plus nutrients (previous studies). When devoid of ants, Tococa showed significantly greater defoliation than control plants; therefore, it was deduced that Tococa probably lacks certain antidefoliator metabolites that control plants possess (both Tococa and control plants are protected by ground-nesting, plant-foraging ants, which is termed 'general myrmecological protection'). Consequently, plant-ants other than A. bequaerti probably also protect Tococa slightly, thus compensating for this deficiency and permitting it to live in the understory until treefall gaps provide the conditions necessary for seed production. (c) 2006 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2006, 89, 91-98.