POLLINATION RELATIONS OF <i>LYCOPERSICON ESCULENTUM</i>
 IN NATIVE AND FOREIGN REGIONS

Rick, Charles M.

doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1950.tb00046.x

Cited by 62 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Observations of buzzing have been made since at least 1902 (e.g. Lindman 1902;Schrottky 1908;Plath 1934;Rayment 1944;Meidell 1944;Osorno-Mesa 1947;Rick 1950; see Teppner 2018 for a discussion on the earliest mention), but it remained little-known and poorly-defined until Michener (1962) and Wille (1963) described the behavior in-depth and referred to it as "buzzing." Buchmann (1974Buchmann ( , 1983 later codified the term "buzz pollination," though he and others have often used alternative terminologies, often within a single paper (Table 1).…”

Section: Buzzingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review and updated classification of pollen gathering behavior in bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea)

Portman¹,

Orr²,

Griswold³

2019

JHR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pollen is the primary protein and nutrient source for bees and they employ many different behaviors to gather it. Numerous terms have been coined to describe pollen gathering behaviors, creating confusion as many are not clearly-defined or overlap with existing terms. There is a need for a clear yet flexible classification that enables accurate, succinct descriptions of pollen gathering behaviors to enable meaningful discussion and comparison. Here, we classify the different pollen gathering behaviors into two main classes: active and incidental pollen collection. Active pollen collection is subdivided into six behaviors: scraping with the extremities, buzzing, rubbing with the body and/or scopae, rubbing with the face, tapping, and rasping. In addition to the active and incidental pollen gathering behaviors, many bees have an intermediate step in which they temporarily accumulate pollen on a discrete patch of specialized hairs. Each behavior is described and illustrated with video examples. Many of these behaviors can be further broken down based on the variations found in different bee species. Different species or individual bees mix and match these pollen collecting behaviors depending on their behavioral plasticity and host plant morphology. Taken together, the different behaviors are combined to create complex behavioral repertoires built on a foundation of simple and basic steps. This classification sets the groundwork for further research on various topics, including behavioral plasticity in different species, comparisons between generalists and specialists, and the relative effectiveness of different pollen gathering behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Buzzingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review and updated classification of pollen gathering behavior in bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea)

Portman¹,

Orr²,

Griswold³

2019

JHR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hoverflies use pollen grooming and scraping routines, either while hovering or resting, to collect and consume pollen accumulated in or actively transferred to their front legs (Holloway, 1976). A particularly striking behavioural difference among pollen‐collecting bees and hoverflies is their ability to produce vibrations to remove pollen from flowers, also known as floral vibrations or sonication (Rick, 1950; Michener, 1962; Buchmann et al ., 1977; Vallejo‐Marin, 2019). While the behaviour of producing floral vibrations has evolved more than 40 separate times in 58% of the 20 000 species of bees (Cardinal et al ., 2018), very few of the 6000 species of hoverflies are known to use vibrations to collect pollen from flowers (Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of defence buzzes in hoverflies and buzz‐pollinating bees

Vallejo‐Marín

Vallejo

2020

Journal of Zoology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bees and many flies, particularly hoverflies (Syrphidae), have evolved a diverse range of mechanisms to gather pollen from a wide variety of flowering plants. Bees and hoverflies use protein‐rich pollen as a food resource to mature reproductive organs and eggs and, in bees, to feed their larvae. A particularly striking pollen‐collecting behaviour involves the production of thoracic vibrations to dislodge pollen from flowers. Vibratile pollen collection is widespread in bees (>11 600 species) but extremely rare in flies (~1 species of hoverfly). Why the use of floral vibrations to collect pollen is so rare among flies is currently unknown. A hypothesis proposed to explain why flies do not engage in vibratile or buzz pollination is that they are unable to reach the vibration amplitude required to expel pollen from anthers. Here we document, for the first time, the mechanical properties of non‐flight thoracic vibrations produced by hoverflies and compare them to the vibrations produced by buzz‐pollinating bees under similar contexts (defence buzzes). We analysed ~4000 vibrations produced by nearly 300 individuals representing 20 species of hoverflies and 22 bee taxa, recorded using a miniature piezoelectric accelerometer. We characterised both frequency and acceleration amplitude components of non‐flight thoracic vibrations and their relationship to insect size. Our results show that, after accounting for size, buzz‐pollinating bees and hoverflies produce vibrations with similar acceleration. We show experimentally that the acceleration amplitude produced by some hoverflies is sufficient to elicit pollen release from buzz‐pollinated flowers (Solanum dulcamara and S. rostratum). Our study does not support the hypothesis that the dearth of buzz‐pollinating flies is caused by their inability to produce vibrations of sufficient amplitude. We discuss alternative hypotheses to explain why most flies do not engage in buzz pollination and suggest that the lack of buzz‐pollinating flies might be best explained through their life history.

show abstract

“…2007). It is also important to consider that most studies on tomato pollination have been performed outside its native geographic area where the bees that might possibly serve as its pollinators, could be absent, or in short supply, thus resulting in an apparent little contribution of the local apifauna to self and cross pollination (see Rick 1950; Azzam 1960; McGregor 1976; Ilardi and Barba 2002). Thus, more research is needed to compare tomato yields and quality in other areas in the Neotropics and the role of bees in self and cross pollination of different varieties.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of native bees and Africanized honey bees (Hymenoptera:Apoidea) to Solanaceae crop pollination in tropical México

Macias‐Macias

Chuc

Ancona-Xiu

et al. 2009

J Applied Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the tropics the contribution of bees as pollinators of important economic indigenous crops remains largely undocumented. We studied the diversity of bee species visiting indigenous tomato (Solanum lycopersicon) and habanero pepper (Capsicum chinense) in subtropical Yucatán, México. The contribution of two native bees, Exomalopsis (E) and Augochloropsis (AG) was compared with that of the introduced Africanized Apis mellífera (HB) for pollinating unvisited flowers in both crops. Apis mellífera and stingless bees were dominant in habanero pepper but solitary bee species were important visitors of tomato. In spite of both crops being autogamic, there was a significant contribution of native bees for pollination of both tomato and habanero pepper. The comparison of fruit weight, number of seeds, and a pollination index based on the latter showed that E and AG were more effective pollinators compared to HB in both crops (ca. Spear’s index of ca. 0.7 vs. 0.35 respectively). In tomato, a further evaluation of the contribution to pollination provided by the three bee species was made using the rate of visits to flowers. Although E and AG were the most efficient pollinators at single flower visits in tomato, none of the three species (including HB) were able to provide single visits to all flowers per unit time to the crop. Our results underline the importance of maintaining diverse assemblages and abundant populations of bee species that can synergically contribute to the productivity of tomato and hot pepper in the Neotropics.

show abstract

POLLINATION RELATIONS OF LYCOPERSICON ESCULENTUM IN NATIVE AND FOREIGN REGIONS

Cited by 62 publications

References 6 publications

A review and updated classification of pollen gathering behavior in bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea)

A review and updated classification of pollen gathering behavior in bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea)

Comparison of defence buzzes in hoverflies and buzz‐pollinating bees

Contribution of native bees and Africanized honey bees (Hymenoptera:Apoidea) to Solanaceae crop pollination in tropical México

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About