Pollination Ecology: Natural History, Perspectives and Future Directions

Torezan‐Silingardi, Helena Maura; Silberbauer-Gottsberger, Ilse; Gottsberger, Gerhard

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-66877-8_6

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 285 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…composita and D . floribunda are seldom visited by insects since they produce less and unattractive floral scents [ 21 , 24 , 25 ]. Such less attractive species have low natural fruit sets (<5%) [ 3 , 21 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This insects' inefficiency is associated with low visitation rate, limited movements, and selectivity [3,[21][22][23]. Some species of yam such as D. composita and D. floribunda are seldom visited by insects since they produce less and unattractive floral scents [21,24,25]. Such less attractive species have low natural fruit sets (<5%) [3,21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Optimum time for hand pollination in yam (Dioscorea spp.)

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hand pollination success rate is low in yam (Dioscorea spp.), due partly to suboptimal weather conditions. Thus, determining the most suitable time for pollination could improve the pollination success in yam breeding programs. We performed continuous hand pollination within flowering windows of D. rotundata and D. alata for two consecutive years to determine the most appropriate month, week, and hours of the day allowing maximum pollination success. In D. alata crossing block, we observed significant differences among crossing hours for pollination success (p = 0.003); morning hours (8–12 a.m.) being more conducive than afternoons (12–5 p.m.). No significant differences existed between crossing hours in D. rotundata, though the mid-day seemed optimal. For both species, the time interval 11–12 a.m. was more appropriate for crossing while 4–5 p.m. was the poorest. However, in vitro pollen germination tests showed that mid-day pollen collection (12 noon–2 p.m.) had better results than both extremes, though there were strong genotypic effects on outcomes. Pollination success rates differed significantly among months for D. alata (p < 0.001) but not for D. rotundata (p > 0.05). Differences in pollination success existed across weeks within flowering windows of both D. alata (p < 0.001) and D. rotundata (p = 0.004). The seed production efficiency (SPE) had a similar trend as the pollination success rate. No clear pattern existed between the pollination time and the seed setting rate (SSR) or seed viability (SV), though their dynamics varied with weeks and months. This study provided an insight on the dynamics of pollination outcomes under the influence of pollination times and allows detecting months, weeks, and hours of the day when hybridization activities should be focused for better results.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimum time for hand pollination in yam (Dioscorea spp.)

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering the existence of a trade-off between the protection of plants and the disruption of pollination processes, we suggest the existence of an “optimal ant mutualist partner”, equivalent to effective pollinators in many pollination systems. The flowers of pollinator-dependent plants are often visited by different floral visitors, in which not all visitors play pollinator roles; see a review in [ 34 ]. Those who visit flowers frequently and touch the reproductive parts are considered effective pollinators, while others which do not visit the flowers frequently but touch the reproductive parts are considered occasional pollinators [ 34 ].…”

Section: Optimal Ant Mutualist Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The flowers of pollinator-dependent plants are often visited by different floral visitors, in which not all visitors play pollinator roles; see a review in [ 34 ]. Those who visit flowers frequently and touch the reproductive parts are considered effective pollinators, while others which do not visit the flowers frequently but touch the reproductive parts are considered occasional pollinators [ 34 ]. Comparing the protection mutualisms between ants and plants mediated by EFNs and the pollination system, aggressive ants that significantly protect plants compared to non-aggressive ants and cause less impacts on pollination processes than other aggressive ants could be considered optimal (effective) mutualist partners.…”

Section: Optimal Ant Mutualist Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging Trends in Ant–Pollinator Conflict in Extrafloral Nectary-Bearing Plants

Calixto,

de Oliveira Pimenta,

Lange

et al. 2024

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The net outcomes of mutualisms are mediated by the trade-offs between the costs and benefits provided by both partners. Our review proposes the existence of a trade-off in ant protection mutualisms between the benefits generated by the ants’ protection against the attack of herbivores and the losses caused by the disruption of pollination processes, which are commonly not quantified. This trade-off has important implications for understanding the evolution of extrafloral nectaries (EFNs), an adaptation that has repeatedly evolved throughout the flowering plant clade. We propose that the outcome of this trade-off is contingent on the specific traits of the organisms involved. We provide evidence that the protective mutualisms between ants and plants mediated by EFNs have optimal protective ant partners, represented by the optimum point of the balance between positive effects on plant protection and negative effects on pollination process. Our review also provides important details about a potential synergism of EFN functionality; that is, these structures can attract ants to protect against herbivores and/or distract them from flowers so as not to disrupt pollination processes. Finally, we argue that generalizations regarding how ants impact plants should be made with caution since ants’ effects on plants vary with the identity of the ant species in their overall net outcome.

show abstract

“…Ant pollination and Richea dracophylla Ollerton et al (2011) estimated that of the approximately 352 000 species of flowering plants, 87.5% are pollinated by animals, and by far the most important pollinators are flying insects (Del-Claro & Torezan-Silingardi, 2021;Torezan-Silingardi et al, 2021). Ants are the most abundant and diverse animal group in most habitats around the world (Hölldobler & Wilson, 1990), yet despite their abundance, diversity, ecological dominance and extraordinary geographic range they have been shown to have a role in pollination of only about 70 species (less than 0.03% of all animal-pollinated plants; Table S1).…”

Section: The Role Of the Calyptramentioning

confidence: 99%

Pollination of Richea dracophylla (Ericaceae) and the role of the nocturnal ant Notoncus hickmani (Formicinae)

Nicol,

McLachlan‐Troup,

McQuillan

2023

Austral Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our observation of large numbers of ants Notoncus hickmani (Formicinae) on the flowers of a Tasmanian endemic shrub Richea dracophyllum (Ericacea) during the night in winter prompted us to carry out a more extensive study of pollination of R. dracophyllum at two sites. Terminal panicles bear inflorescences of 300+ flowers whose petals are fused into calyptrae covering the reproductive organs, and the calyptrae must be removed before pollination can occur. To exclude birds, we placed mesh bags over some inflorescences. Inflorescences with exclusion bags had a high proportion of retained calyptra and the numbers of viable seeds were greatly reduced. We found R. dracophyllum to have a very long flowering period (more than 6 months) and a range of floral visitors, including honey‐eaters (Meliphagidae) and flying insects. At one site we observed large numbers (up to 100) of N. hickmani on inflorescences between dusk and midnight during winter at air temperatures down to 2.5°C. They fed on nectar from flowers that had lost their calyptra where they were exposed to pollen from the anthers and scanning electron microscopy showed high numbers of pollen grains being carried on the ants. The feeding behaviour of these ants would facilitate pollination between adjacent flowers (geitonogamy). Smaller numbers of dolichoderine ants (Iridomyrmex bicknelli?) were observed during the daytime in spring but mainly fed under partially detached calyptrae where they had little exposure to pollen. We suggest that R. dracophylla is pollinated by a range of species and functional groups—birds, flying insects and ants, and that the pollinating species will vary during the year and between sites, although insects depend on birds to remove the calyptrae. Ant pollination is rare, nocturnal ant pollination is extremely rare, and pollination by nocturnal cryophilic ants has not been documented previously.

show abstract

Pollination Ecology: Natural History, Perspectives and Future Directions

Cited by 11 publications

References 285 publications

Optimum time for hand pollination in yam (Dioscorea spp.)

Optimum time for hand pollination in yam (Dioscorea spp.)

Emerging Trends in Ant–Pollinator Conflict in Extrafloral Nectary-Bearing Plants

Pollination of Richea dracophylla (Ericaceae) and the role of the nocturnal ant Notoncus hickmani (Formicinae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About