Resource partitioning among flower visitors and evolution of nectar concealment in multi–species communities

Rodríguez‐Gironés, Miguel A.; Santamarı́a, Luis

doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.2936

Cited by 26 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(71 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But exploitation barriers can also be subtle traits, such as colour (Raven 1972;Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2004) and fragrance (Galen et al 2011)-because a change in colour or scent can make flowers more difficult to detect. In this paper we present a general framework to study the evolution of exploitation barriers, generalising a previous model investigating the conditions under which barriers that impose costs to effective pollinators can evolve (Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2005). The idea is to determine first their effect on the foraging choices of pollinators, and then to compute how foraging choices translate into pollen export and expected fitness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive partner choice through exploitation barriers

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral features that affect the efficiency with which pollinators can harvest their resources, or the profitability they obtain from them, affect the foraging decisions of pollinators. Foraging choices of pollinators, in turn, affect pollen flow: increases in flower constancy lead to more efficient pollen transport. It follows that exploitation barriersflower traits that differentially affect net intake rates of potential visitors-will promote resource partitioning and enhance pollen export. In this paper we first generalise foraging models to show that exploitation barriers can lead to partial resource partitioning even when flowers are randomly distributed in space. Then we develop a model to study how the foraging rules of pollinators, pollen removal and pollen deposition, affect pollen flow. The model shows that resource partitioning, even incomplete, can substantially increase the efficiency of pollen flow. Finally, we use computer simulations to demonstrate that exploitation barriers promoting partial resource partitioning can evolve. Many of the flower traits associated with pollination syndromes have small but consistent effects on the efficiency with which different taxonomic groups exploit flowers, and can be considered exploitation barriers. Even if these barriers are not strong enough to promote strict specialisation, and may have little effect on the female component of fitness when pollinators are not a limiting resource, they are likely to be selected because they enhance the male component of fitness.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive partner choice through exploitation barriers

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It follows that moths can transport pollen grains from one plant species to the other. Pollen loss cannot occur when each pollinator specializes on flowers of a single species, as assumed by Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría (2005). The results of the individual-based models show that deep corollas readily evolve when longtongued nectarivores are more effective pollinators of one plant species and short-tongued visitors are more effective pollinators of the other plant species.…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…We recently presented gametheoretical models suggesting that long corollas can evolve as a means of nectar concealment (Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2005). In general, differences in the relative ability of flower visitors to exploit coexisting resources can lead to resource partitioning (Possingham 1992;Rodrí-guez-Gironés 2006), and resource partitioning can promote the evolution of nectar concealment when the less effective pollinator is most affected by the evolving nectar barriers (Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, we assumed (1) that plants are distributed in patches, so pollinators have to choose between visiting patches of one plant species or the other (an implicit assumption of Possingham 1992); (2) that pollinators are omniscient optimal foragers and follow the foraging strategy that maximizes their nectar intake rate; and (3) that all plants with the same phenotype have the same reproductive success, this being a linear function of the rate at which the average flower is visited by pollinators (Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2005). Furthermore, the model ignored the genetics of the evolving traits, implicitly assuming asexual reproduction, as is standard practice in evolutionary game theory (Maynard Smith 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Resource Competition, Character Displacement, and the Evolution of Deep Corolla Tubes

Rodríguez‐Gironés

Santamarı́a

2007

The American Naturalist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is normally thought that deep corolla tubes evolve when the plant's successful reproduction is contingent on having a corolla tube longer than the tongue of the flower's pollinators. Combining optimal foraging theory and quantitative genetics in a spatially explicit, individual-based model, we show that flowers with long corolla tubes can alternatively evolve because they promote resource partitioning among nectar feeders and increase the probability of conspecific pollen transfer. When there is competition for resources, long-tongued flower visitors feed preferentially at deep flowers and short-tongued visitors at shallow flowers. Both plant species thus benefit when the depths of their corollas are so different that each flower visitor specializes on one species. Resource competition can promote the evolution of deep corollas despite the presence of significant amounts of noise, such as deviations from optimal foraging behavior due to perceptual errors or temporal fluctuations in the relative abundance of competing pollinator species. Our results can explain the evolution of long corollas in a number of systems that do not conform to the traditional view.

show abstract

“…Even more, although we did not detect indirect selection on color through correlated traits, it is still possible that other traits (different to the ones measured here) may alter the relationship between color and fitness. For example, floral scent can influence bumblebee's choices and color discrimination (Kunze and Gumbert 2001); color may act as a clue indicating the quality of nectar (Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2004) and nectar rewards may affect also pollinator choices (Rodríguez-Gironés and Santamaría 2005;Veiga et al 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Are pollinators and seed predators selective agents on flower color in Gentiana lutea?

Veiga

Guitián

et al. 2015

Evol Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals which interact with plants often cause selective pressures on plant traits. Flower color variation within a species might be shaped by the action of animals feeding on the plant species. Pollinators might exert natural selection on color if flower color is related to their foraging efficiency. For example, some pollinator species might require more time to detect particular colors. If that is the case, flower color might have evolved as a pollination exploitation barrier-ensuring that flowers are more visited by the most efficient pollinators. In addition, non-pollinator agents such as predispersal seed predators may select on flower color, if color indicates food resources (seeds) or if color is related to deterrent compounds. We address selection on flower color in a population of Gentiana lutea where color varies among individuals from yellow to orange. We hypothesize that opposed selection from mutualists (pollinators) and antagonists (predispersal seed predators) maintains flower color variation in this population. By means of path analysis we addressed the role of both interactors in flower color selection. We found that selection acts on flower color, mediated by both pollinators and seed predators. Both agents favored yellow-flowered individuals, thus selection by pollinators and seed predators does not maintain flower color variation in this population.

show abstract

Resource partitioning among flower visitors and evolution of nectar concealment in multi–species communities

Cited by 26 publications

References 39 publications

Passive partner choice through exploitation barriers

Passive partner choice through exploitation barriers

Resource Competition, Character Displacement, and the Evolution of Deep Corolla Tubes

Are pollinators and seed predators selective agents on flower color in Gentiana lutea?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About