1. Digital video recording (DVR) devices, such as the GoPro Hero, have the potential to greatly benefit pollination ecology, but the advantages of digitally recording pollinator activity over direct human observation have not been formally assessed.2. Two plant taxa, Lavandula angustifolia and Canna 'sp.', with differing floral morphology, were used to compare the value of DVR and direct observations in estimating honeybee (Apis mellifera) visitation, flower density and number of flowers visited per foraging bout.3. The two methods yielded identical results when observing the structurally simple L. angustifolia at both high (10.54 ± 0.52 per plant) and low honeybee density (2.24 ± 0.20 per plant). However, DVR underestimated the number of flowers scored in the field of view (28.7 ± 1.8 direct vs. 22.7 ± 0.9 DVR), the number of honeybees observed (5.3 ± 0.8 direct vs. 3.7 ± 0.7 DVR) and the number of flowers visited during foraging bouts (8.3 ± 1.2 direct vs. 5.5 ± 1.0 DVR) on the more complex Canna 'sp.' 4. It is concluded that portable weatherproof DVR devices such as the GoPro Hero are valuable tools for pollination biologists, allowing a single researcher to make simultaneous observations of multiple plants in one or more sites, whilst also allowing the footage to be reviewed. However, DVR devices are limited by their depth and field of view when target plants are large or structurally complex.

Many Acacia species in arid areas of eastern Australia have been severely impacted by grazing, habitat degradation and fragmentation. These factors have been at the core of proposed explanations for the reproductive failure and numerical decline of Acacia carneorum and other threatened acacias. Paradoxically, the sympatric Acacia ligulata is thriving and highly fecund. Although these species have superficially similar floral displays, differences in sexual reproductive success may reflect interactions between flower and inflorescence ontogeny and pollinator assemblages. We compared the floral biology and flower visitor assemblages of A. carneorum and A. ligulata at four sites per species. Both species displayed similar floral ontogeny and synchronicity of display, with inflorescences simultaneously hermaphroditic for 4–5 days. However, A. ligulata displayed a higher density of flowers than A. carneorum and, while both species received a range of flower visitors, A. ligulata was visited by relatively few species and was serviced primarily by the non‐native honeybee Apis mellifera, which typically made many within‐plant movements during foraging bouts. In contrast, A. carneorum was visited by a diverse suite of native insects that carried little pollen and made fewer within plant movements. On average, Apis mellifera carried 98.4 % A. ligulata pollen, whereas the native insect visitors of A. carneorum carried only 45 % A. carneorum pollen. Differing floral ontogeny or lack of native pollinators does not explain the reproductive failure of A. carneorum. The success of A. ligulata may reflect pollination services provided by A. mellifera and interactions with plant mating systems.

No abstract

No abstract

. (2017). Do introduced honeybees affect seed set and seed quality in a plant adapted for bird pollination?. Journal of Plant Ecology, 10 (4), 721-729. Do introduced honeybees affect seed set and seed quality in a plant adapted for bird pollination? Abstract Aims: Worldwide, evidence suggests that exotic pollinators can disrupt plant mating patterns. However, few studies have determined if pollination by the honeybee Apis mellifera (the world's most widely introduced pollinator) reduces offspring quality when compared with pollination by native birds. The Australian Proteaceae provide an excellent opportunity to test the impact of honeybees in pollination systems that are adapted to birds and non-flying mammals. Methods:We compared the frequency of flower visitation and foraging behaviour of birds and insects within seven populations of Banksia ericifolia. Banksia ericifolia is hermaphroditic and has large nectar-rich, orange inflorescences typical of bird and mammal pollinated species. For a subset of the study populations, we compared the quality of seed produced via an exclusion treatment (that only allowed invertebrates to access flowers) with an open-pollination treatment (potentially visited by mammals, birds and invertebrates), by measuring seed weight, germination rates (T50), percent germination, seedling height after 14 days since the emergence of the cotyledon and time to emergence of the cotyledon.Important Findings: Apis mellifera was the only apparent insect pollinator and the most frequent flower visitor, while the open treatment inflorescences were also frequently visited by avian pollinators, primarily honeyeater species. The foraging behaviour of honeybees and honeyeaters showed striking differences that potentially affect patterns of pollen transfer. Honeybees made significantly greater proportions of within cf. among plant movements and only 30% (n=48) of honeybees foraged for pollen (nectar foragers carried no pollen) whilst all birds were observed to contact both stigmas and anthers when foraging for nectar. Despite these fundamental differences in behaviour, there was little effect of treatment on seed set or quality. Our data show that while honeybees appear to alter patterns of pollen transfer within B. ericifolia populations, they do not impact reproductive rates or performance of early life-stages. an excellent opportunity to test the impact of honeybees in pollination systems that are adapted to birds and non-flying mammals. MethodsWe compared the frequency of flower visitation and foraging behaviour of birds and insects within seven populations of Banksia ericifolia. Banksia ericifolia is hermaphroditic and has large nectar-rich, orange inflorescences typical of bird and mammal pollinated species. For a subset of the study populations, we compared the quality of seed produced via an exclusion treatment (that only allowed invertebrates to access flowers) with an open-pollination treatment (potentially visited by mammals, birds and invertebrates), by measuring seed weight, germinati...

Pollinator communities are composed of diverse groups of insects, with radically different life histories and resource needs. Blow flies are known to visit a variety of economically important crop plants. Larval blow flies develop by feeding on decaying animals. Some fruit growers are known to place carrion on farms during the flowering season to attract adult blow flies (Calliphoridae). However, the efficacy of these “stink stations” has not been tested. We conducted a series of experiments to determine: 1) if stink stations promote the abundance of blow flies in mango orchards (Mangifera indica L.), 2) if any increases in the abundance of flies acts to promote pollination and fruit set in Australian mango orchards. Farms with stink stations had approximately three times more flies than control farms. However, the increased abundance of blow flies did not result in increased fruit set. Although stink stations increased the abundance of blow flies, we found no evidence that their use improves mango yield. This may be due to pollination saturation by a highly abundant native hover fly, Mesembrius bengalensis (Syrphidae), during our study. We hypothesize that stink stations may only be beneficial in years or regions where other pollinators are less abundant.

No abstract

Co-flowering plants can experience an array of interactions, ranging from facilitation to competition, the direction and strength of which are often dependent on the relative abundance and diversity of the plant species involved and the foraging behavior of their pollinators. Understanding interactions between plant–pollinator networks and how they change over time is particularly important within agricultural systems, such as apples, that flower en masse and that also contain non-crop co-flowering species both within the farm and the surrounding landscape. We determined the degree of overlap between pollinator networks on two varieties of apple (Granny Smith and Pink Lady) and co-flowering plant species within orchards and the wider vegetation matrix in two apple-growing regions (Orange and Bilpin) in Australia. We surveyed plant–pollinator interactions at key stages of the cropping cycle: before mass flowering; during king, peak and late blooms; and, finally, once apple flowering had finished. Overall, we found considerable overlap in the flower visitor assemblage on apples and co-flowering species within the orchard. The introduced honeybee (Apis mellifera) was the most frequent flower visitor to all three vegetation types at all times in Orange. However, in Bilpin, both a native stingless bee (Tetragonula carbonaria) and A. mellifera were highly frequent visitors, both on- and off-crop. Numerous native bees, flies and Lepidoptera also commonly visited apple and co-flowering species within orchards in both locations. We found that native-bee and honeybee visitation to apple flowers was positively correlated with co-flowering species richness (within the orchard and the wider matrix); however, visitation by native bees decreased as the area of co-flowering species in the surrounding landscape increased. Our study highlights the importance of maintaining diverse co-flowering plant communities within the local landscape to increase and support a wide variety of pollinators in horticultural production systems.