Floral Scent in Food‐Deceptive Orchids: Species Specificity and Sources of Variability

Salzmann, C. C.; Cozzolino, Salvatore; Schiestl, Florian P.

doi:10.1055/s-2007-965614

Cited by 65 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Empirical studies have shown that phenotypic and genetic variation in nectar traits can have signiÞcant direct and indirect impacts on pollination success (Galen and Newport 1988, Mitchell 2004, Salzmann et al 2007, Majetic et al 2009). In our study, pistillate ßowers produced signiÞcantly more nectar than staminate ßowers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Honey Bee,Apis mellifera, Hives and Field Size on Foraging Activity of Native Bee Species in Pumpkin Fields

Artz¹,

Hsu²,

Nault³

2011

Environ Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to identify bee species active in pumpkin Þelds in New York and to estimate their potential as pollinators by examining their foraging activity. In addition, we examined whether foraging activity was affected by either the addition of hives of the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., or by Þeld size. Thirty-Þve pumpkin (Cucurbita spp.) Þelds ranging from 0.6 to 26.3 ha, 12 supplemented with A. mellifera hives and 23 not supplemented, were sampled during peak ßowering over three successive weeks in 2008 and 2009. Flowers from 300 plants per Þeld were visually sampled for bees on each sampling date. A. mellifera, Bombus impatiens Cresson, and Peponapis pruinosa (Say) accounted for 99% of all bee visits to ßowers. A. mellifera and B. impatiens visited signiÞcantly more pistillate ßowers than would be expected by chance, whereas P. pruinosa showed no preference for visiting pistillate ßowers. There were signiÞcantly more A. mellifera visits per ßower in Þelds supplemented with A. mellifera hives than in Þelds not supplemented, but there were signiÞcantly fewer P. pruinosa visits in supplemented Þelds. The number of B. impatiens visits was not affected by supplementation, but was affected by number of ßowers per Þeld. A. mellifera and P. pruinosa visits were not affected by Þeld size, but B. impatiens visited fewer ßowers as Þeld size increased in Þelds that were not supplemented with A. mellifera hives. Declining A. mellifera populations may increase the relative importance of B. impatiens in pollinating pumpkins in New York.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Honey Bee,Apis mellifera, Hives and Field Size on Foraging Activity of Native Bee Species in Pumpkin Fields

Artz¹,

Hsu²,

Nault³

2011

Environ Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Floral scents usually advertise a food source provided by the flowers. In deceptive plants, however, flower scents are a false promise of a reward, such as food, a mating partner or an oviposition site (Salzmann et al, 2007;Jürgens et al, 2013;Bohmann et al, 2014) that these plants do not actually offer. Among these cheaters are plants of the genus Ceropegia L. (Apocynaceae, Asclepiadoideae) with more than 200 described species, characterized by sophisticated pitfall flowers (Vogel, 1961;Masinde, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deceptive Ceropegia dolichophylla fools its kleptoparasitic fly pollinators with exceptional floral scent

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ceropegia species (Apocynaceae) have deceptive pitfall flowers and exploit small flies as pollinators, supposedly by chemical mimicry. Only preliminary data on the composition of flower scents are available for a single species so far, and the mimicry system is not yet understood in any species. We collected data on basic pollination aspects of C. dolichophylla, analyzed floral scent by gas chromatography linked to mass spectrometry (GC/MS), identified electrophysiologically active scent components by gas chromatography coupled with electroantennographic detection (GC/EAD), and determined compounds responsible for pollinator attraction in bioassays. We found that flowers of C. dolichophylla are visited by small flies of several taxa. Only Milichiidae and Chloropidae carried pollinaria and are, thus, pollinators. The pollen transfer efficiency (PTE) at two different sites was 2% and 4%, respectively. The floral scent was dominated by spiroacetals, mainly (2S,6R,8S)-8-methyl-2-propyl-1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane, n-tridecane, and N-(3-methylbutyl)acetamide. This spiroacetal and the acetamide elicited the most intense electrophysiological responses in fly antennae, and bioassays confirmed the capability of the spiroacetal in eliciting behavioral responses in pollinators. Most flies, determined as pollinators of C. dolichophylla, are kleptoparasites. They exploit insect prey of predatory arthropods as food source to which they are attracted by volatiles. undecane and N-(3-methylbutyl)acetamide have not been identified before as volatiles of other plants, however, they are known as insect volatiles. Both compounds occur in the venom glands of paper wasps, a potential food source for the pollinators of C. dolichophylla. We propose that C. dolichophylla shows a kleptomyiophilous pollination strategy. It mimics insect related odors to exploit the food-seeking behavior of its kleptoparasitic pollinators.

show abstract

“…Only as a rare exception, flowers emit single compounds Wiemer et al 2009), but usually fragrance consists of complex blends of VOCs originating from different biosynthetic pathways (Raguso 2008). Such bouquets are often taxon-or population specific, by means of different qualitative composition, or just different proportions of the same compounds (Chess et al 2008;Huber et al 2005;Mant et al 2005;Salzmann et al 2007a). Different compounds in a bouquet can have different functions, thus the production of a range of different compounds can help the plant to fulfill different tasks in its interaction with other organisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phenotypic selection on floral scent: trade-off between attraction and deterrence?

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flowers emit a large variety of floral signals that play a fundamental role in the communication of plants with their mutualists and antagonists. We investigated phenotypic selection on floral scent and floral display using the rewarding orchid species Gymnadenia odoratissima. We found positive directional selection on inflorescence size, as well as positive and negative selection on floral scent compounds. Structural equation modeling showed that ''active'' compounds, i.e. those that were shown in earlier investigations to be detected by pollinator insects, were positively linked to fitness, whereas ''non-active'' were negatively linked to fitness. Our results suggest that different patterns of selection impact on different scent compounds, which may relate to the functions of compounds for attracting/deterring insects.

show abstract

Floral Scent in Food‐Deceptive Orchids: Species Specificity and Sources of Variability

Cited by 65 publications

References 58 publications

Influence of Honey Bee,Apis mellifera, Hives and Field Size on Foraging Activity of Native Bee Species in Pumpkin Fields

Influence of Honey Bee,Apis mellifera, Hives and Field Size on Foraging Activity of Native Bee Species in Pumpkin Fields

Deceptive Ceropegia dolichophylla fools its kleptoparasitic fly pollinators with exceptional floral scent

Phenotypic selection on floral scent: trade-off between attraction and deterrence?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About