Evidence of a volatile attractant in &lt;i&gt;Ficus ingens&lt;/i&gt; (Moraceae)*

J of Evolutionary Biology

Hossaert‐McKey

et al. 1995

“…Further work needs to focus on the basis of fig attractivity, namely, the volatile chemicals emitted by receptive figs (Barker, 1985;Hossaert-McKey et al, 1994) Grafen,…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pollinators entering female dioecious figs: why commit suicide?

Patel

J of Evolutionary Biology

Hossaert‐McKey

et al. 1995

“…Until very recently, receptivity of the female flowers was believed to last only a few days (e.g. (Barker, 1985;van Noort, Ware & Compton, 1989;Hossaert-McKey, Gibernau & Frey, 1994). However, recent experimental work has shown that female receptivity of an individual fig lasts several weeks in the absence of pollination (Khadari et al, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Waiting for wasps: consequences for the pollination dynamics of Ficus pertusa L.

Journal of Biogeography

Kjellberg

Bronstein

1996

Abstract. Pollination of fig trees depends on mutualist wasps that reproduce within their flowers. Until recently, it was assumed that there was a short window of time during which a fig crop could be pollinated. Hence, pollination of figs was thought to depend on extreme efficiency of the wasps in locating receptive trees. In that context, extensive data on the Costa Rican fig tree Ficus pertusa L. have been very difficult to understand. In F. pertusa, figs of different crops attract wasps at different stages of their development. The crops that attract wasps the earliest in their development are the most heavily visited ones, but mature the fewest pollinator offspring and seeds on a per‐fig basis. Using simulation models of pollinator population dynamics and field data, we show that (i) attractiveness of a crop is prolonged, (ii) wasps prefer large figs when given a choice, and (iii) the observed pattern of preferential early visitation of crops can be explained by temporal variations in pollinator abundance. This emphasizes the importance of population‐level mechanisms to explain the fig/fig wasp mutualism.

“…Very little is known about the cues for long-distance attraction of the wasps to fig trees (Barker, 1985;Van Noort, Ware, and Compton, 1989), but volatile chemical attractants are clearly involved (Ware et al, 1993;Hossaert-McKey, Gibernau, and Frey, 1994;Ware and Compton, 1994). Very little is known about the cues for long-distance attraction of the wasps to fig trees (Barker, 1985;Van Noort, Ware, and Compton, 1989), but volatile chemical attractants are clearly involved (Ware et al, 1993;Hossaert-McKey, Gibernau, and Frey, 1994;Ware and Compton, 1994).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

When Figs Wait for Pollinators: The Length of Fig Receptivity

Khadari¹,

Gibernau²,

American Journal of Botany

et al. 1995

In plant species with an obligate species‐specific pollinator, gamete encounter is a critical phase in the success of reproductive strategies. One of the key factors in the success of gamete encounter, the length of female receptivity, has been rarely studied experimentally. In Ficus species (Moraceae), each exclusively associated with its specific pollinating wasp, the receptive female phase of individual syconia was believed to last only a few days. This estimate, based on field observations of pollinator arrivals, neglected the possibility that unpollinated syconia may remain receptive for a prolonged period. In two distantly related fig species (F. carica and F. aurea), we measured experimentally the duration of receptivity of individual syconia protected from pollinator visits. For these two species, receptivity lasted from 2 to 3 wk. Syconia pollinated at any time during this period of receptivity are capable of setting seeds. Furthermore, it has been assumed that female syconium receptivity stops quickly after pollinator visitation. Our experiments showed that syconia of both species are able to extend their receptive period for a few days longer when visited only by a single wasp. The demonstration of a long duration of female receptivity has important consequences for understanding the maintenance of the fig‐wasp mutualism.