The importance of flower visitors not predicted by floral syndromes

Merxem, D. Geelhand de; Borremans, Benny; Jager, Marinus L. de; Johnson, T.; Jooste, Michelle; Ros, P.; Zenni, Rafael Dudeque; Ellis, Allan G.; Anderson, Bruce

doi:10.1016/j.sajb.2009.08.002

Cited by 27 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, the association of long tubes with more terminal nodes should not be regarded as an evolutionary dead end. One reason may be that longer tubes in this system do not result in increased ecological specialization because long tubes do not exclude nectar access by bees, which can still forage for nectar when it wells up the tubes in the absence or scarcity of long proboscid pollinators [35]. This welling up of nectar has also been noted in other Iridaceae and is enhanced by narrowing of the perianth tube [33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intraspecific divergence and convergence of floral tube length in specialized pollination interactions

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral tubes are often thought to be a consequence of adaptive specialization towards pollinator morphology. We explore floral tube length evolution within Tritoniopsis revoluta (Iridaceae), a species with considerable geographical tube length variation. We ask whether tube lengths of T. revoluta populations are associated with pollinator proboscis lengths, whether floral divergence occurs in the presence of different pollinators and whether floral convergence occurs between distantly related populations pollinated by the same pollinator. Finally, we ask whether tube length evolution is directional. Shifts between morphologically different pollinators were always associated with shifts in floral morphology, even when populations were very closely related. Distantly related populations had similar tube lengths when they were pollinated by the same pollinator. Shifts in tube length tended to be from short to long, although reversals were not infrequent. After correcting for the population-level phylogeny, there was a strong positive, linear relationship between floral tube length and pollinator proboscis length, suggesting that plants are functionally specialized on different pollinators at different sites. However, because tube length evolution in this system can be a bidirectional process, specialization to the local pollinator fauna is unlikely to result in evolutionary or ecological dead-ends such as canalization or range limitation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…R. Soc. B 281: 20141420 flowers with highly variable (40-70 mm) tube lengths [31], and their nectar is known to be consumed by long proboscid flies [32 -34] and anthophorid bees [35]. Newman et al [21] suggest that short-and long-tubed populations of T. revoluta are pollinator ecotypes, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraspecific divergence and convergence of floral tube length in specialized pollination interactions

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even visitors which are clearly mismatched with the flowers they visit, might occasionally successfully access the reward and pollinate flowers (e.g. de Merxem et al ., ). In those cases, strong selection on floral traits might lead to rapid adaptation to the locally most effective pollinator.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Floral specialization for different pollinators and divergent use of the same pollinator among co-occurringImpatiensspecies (Balsaminaceae) from Southeast Asia

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral variation among closely related species is thought to often reflect differences in pollination systems. Flowers of the large genus Impatiens are characterized by extensive variation in colour, shape and size and in anther and stigma positioning, but studies of their pollination ecology are scarce and most lack a comparative context. Consequently, the function of floral diversity in Impatiens remains enigmatic. This study documents floral variation and pollination of seven co‐occurring Impatiens spp. in the Southeast Asian diversity hotspot. To assess whether floral trait variation reflects specialization for different pollination systems, we tested whether species depend on pollinators for reproduction, identified animals that visit flowers, determined whether these visitors play a role in pollination and quantified and compared key floral traits, including floral dimensions and nectar characteristics. Experimental exclusion of insects decreased fruit and seed set significantly for all species except I. muscicola, which also received almost no visits from animals. Most species received visits from several animals, including bees, birds, butterflies and hawkmoths, only a subset of which were effective pollinators. Impatiens psittacina, I. kerriae, I. racemosa and I. daraneenae were pollinated by bees, primarily Bombus haemorrhoidalis. Impatiens chiangdaoensis and I. santisukii had bimodal pollination systems which combined bee and lepidopteran pollination. Floral traits differed significantly among species with different pollination systems. Autogamous flowers were small and spurless, and did not produce nectar; bee‐pollinated flowers had short spurs and large floral chambers with a wide entrance; and bimodally bee‐ and lepidopteran‐pollinated species had long spurs and a small floral chamber with a narrow entrance. Nectar‐producing species with different pollination systems did not differ in nectar volume and sugar concentration. Despite the high frequency of bee pollination in co‐occurring species, individuals with a morphology suggestive of hybrid origin were rare. Variation in floral architecture, including various forms of corolla asymmetry, facilitates distinct, species‐specific pollen‐placement on visiting bees. Our results show that floral morphological diversity among Impatiens spp. is associated with both differences in functional pollinator groups and divergent use of the same pollinator. Non‐homologous mechanisms of floral asymmetry are consistent with repeated independent evolution, suggesting that competitive interactions among species with the same pollination system have been an important driver of floral variation among Impatiens spp.

show abstract

“…Such flowers are traditionally viewed as highly specialized (Stebbins 1970 ). Specialized flowers are however also visited by insect that do not fit “pollination syndrome” and pollinator composition may differ considerably between populations (even located closely to one another) (Nepi et al 2003 ; de Merxem et al 2009 ). Specific flower visitors are especially sensitive to changes in pollinating fauna induced by habitat types, i.e., functional group of insect to plant species can differ greatly between urban and suburban environments compared to semi-natural and agricultural ones (Geslin et al 2013 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Micromorphological and histochemical attributes of flowers and floral reward in Linaria vulgaris (Plantaginaceae)

Jachuła

Konarska

2018

Protoplasma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The self-incompatible flowers of Linaria vulgaris have developed a range of mechanisms for attraction of insect visitors/pollinators and deterrence of ineffective pollinators and herbivores. These adaptive traits include the flower size and symmetry, the presence of a spur as a “secondary nectar presenter,” olfactory (secondary metabolites) and sensual (scent, flower color, nectar guide—contrasting palate) signals, and floral rewards, i.e. pollen and nectar. Histochemical tests revealed that the floral glandular trichomes produced essential oils and flavonoids, and pollen grains contained flavonoids, terpenoids, and steroids, which play a role of olfactory attractants/repellents. The nectary gland is disc-shaped and located at the base of the ovary. Nectar is secreted through numerous modified stomata. Nectar secretion began in the bud stage and lasted to the end of anthesis. The amount of produced nectar depended on the flower age and ranged from 0.21 to 3.95 mg/flower (mean = 1.51 mg). The concentration of sugars in the nectar reached up to 57.0%. Both the nectar amount and sugar concentration demonstrated a significant year and population effect. Pollen production was variable between the years of the study. On average, a single flower of L. vulgaris produced 0.31 mg of pollen. The spectrum of insect visitors in the flowers of L. vulgaris differed significantly between populations. In the urban site, Bombus terrestris and Apis mellifera were the most common visitors, while a considerable number of visits of wasps and syrphid flies were noted in the rural site.

show abstract

The importance of flower visitors not predicted by floral syndromes

Cited by 27 publications

References 21 publications

Intraspecific divergence and convergence of floral tube length in specialized pollination interactions

Intraspecific divergence and convergence of floral tube length in specialized pollination interactions

Floral specialization for different pollinators and divergent use of the same pollinator among co-occurringImpatiensspecies (Balsaminaceae) from Southeast Asia

Micromorphological and histochemical attributes of flowers and floral reward in Linaria vulgaris (Plantaginaceae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About