Costs of inflorescence longevity for an Asian fig tree and its pollinator

Zhang, Yuan; Yang, Da‐Rong; Peng, Yan‐Qiong; Compton, Stephen G.

doi:10.1007/s10682-011-9525-3

Cited by 12 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Younger female figs are typically more successful at setting good quality seed, so overlap between the start of female receptivity and pollinator release will be most favorable for the plants [26], [51]. However, in Taohua island, there are both early and late flowering females coinciding with the emergence of both pollinators.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competitive Exclusion among Fig Wasps Achieved via Entrainment of Host Plant Flowering Phenology

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Molecular techniques are revealing increasing numbers of morphologically similar but co-existing cryptic species, challenging the niche theory. To understand the co-existence mechanism, we studied phenologies of morphologically similar species of fig wasps that pollinate the creeping fig (F. pumila) in eastern China. We compared phenologies of fig wasp emergence and host flowering at sites where one or both pollinators were present. At the site where both pollinators were present, we used sticky traps to capture the emerged fig wasps and identified species identity using mitochondrial DNA COI gene. We also genotyped F. pumila individuals of the three sites using polymorphic microsatellites to detect whether the host populations were differentiated. Male F. pumila produced two major crops annually, with figs receptive in spring and summer. A small partial third crop of receptive figs occurred in the autumn, but few of the second crop figs matured at that time. Hence, few pollinators were available to enter third crop figs and they mostly aborted, resulting in two generations of pollinating wasps each year, plus a partial third generation. Receptive figs were produced on male plants in spring and summer, timed to coincide with the release of short-lived adult pollinators from the same individual plants. Most plants were pollinated by a single species. Plants pollinated by Wiebesia sp. 1 released wasps earlier than those pollinated by Wiebesia sp. 3, with little overlap. Plants occupied by different pollinators were not spatially separated, nor genetically distinct. Our findings show that these differences created mismatches with the flight periods of the other Wiebesia species, largely ‘reserving’ individual plants for the resident pollinator species. This pre-emptive competitive displacement may prevent long term co-existence of the two pollinators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competitive Exclusion among Fig Wasps Achieved via Entrainment of Host Plant Flowering Phenology

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figs start to become less attractive to other pollinators a few hours after they have been entered, though this is postponed in some species if they have only received a single pollinator [20,21]. The cessation of release of attractant volatiles may reflect both the termination of production and closure of the ostiole.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Floral longevity (the length of time that a flower remains available for pollination) varies greatly among different plant species, and reflects a balance between the benefits of greater likelihood of pollinator visitation and the cost of flower maintenance [22–25]. Figs display extended floral longevity and if they are not entered by fig wasps they remain attractive to pollinators for days or weeks [20,21,26], but prolongation of receptivity may come at the cost of reduced reproductive efficiency among older figs [20]. Two studies have reported that pollinator females are more likely to enter younger figs [21,26], though the proximal causes of this preference have not been established.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figs display extended floral longevity and if they are not entered by fig wasps they remain attractive to pollinators for days or weeks [20,21,26], but prolongation of receptivity may come at the cost of reduced reproductive efficiency among older figs [20]. Two studies have reported that pollinator females are more likely to enter younger figs [21,26], though the proximal causes of this preference have not been established. Fig wasps may be responding to subtle changes in the quality as well as the quality of volatiles released as figs age, because higher numbers of offspring (and seeds) have been recorded from figs that were pollinated shortly after becoming receptive, with productivity then declining progressively with the length of time that the figs had waited to be pollinated [21,26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two studies have reported that pollinator females are more likely to enter younger figs [21,26], though the proximal causes of this preference have not been established. Fig wasps may be responding to subtle changes in the quality as well as the quality of volatiles released as figs age, because higher numbers of offspring (and seeds) have been recorded from figs that were pollinated shortly after becoming receptive, with productivity then declining progressively with the length of time that the figs had waited to be pollinated [21,26]. These studies also reported more subtle changes in the reproductive success of the pollinators, with sex ratios among offspring becoming less female-biased in older figs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Larger Fig Wasps Are More Careful About Which Figs to Enter – With Good Reason

Liu

Yang²,

Compton³

et al. 2013

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral longevity reflects a balance between gains in pollinator visitation and the costs of flower maintenance. Because rewards to pollinators change over time, older flowers may be less attractive, reducing the value of extended longevity. Un-pollinated figs, the inflorescences of Ficus species, can remain receptive for long periods, but figs that are older when entered by their host-specific fig wasp pollinators produce fewer seeds and fig wasp offspring. Our field experiments with Ficus hispida , a dioecious fig tree, examined how the length of time that receptive figs have remained un-pollinated influences the behaviour and reproductive success of its short-lived fig wasp pollinator, Ceratosolensolmsi marchali. The results were consistent in three different seasons, and on male and female trees, although receptivity was greatly extended during colder months. Pollinators took longer to find the ostioles of older figs, and longer to penetrate them. They also became increasingly unwilling to enter figs as they aged, and increasing numbers of the wasps became trapped in the ostiolar bracts. Larger individuals were particularly unwilling to enter older figs, resulting in older figs being pollinated by smaller wasps. On female trees, where figs produce only seeds, seed production declined rapidly with fig age. On male trees, the numbers and size of fig wasp offspring declined, and a higher proportion were male. Older male figs are harder to enter, especially for larger individuals, and offer poorer quality oviposition opportunities. This study opens an interesting new perspective on the coevolution of figs and their pollinators, especially factors influencing pollinator body size and emphasises the subtleties of interactions between mutualists.

show abstract