VIABILITY OF POLLEN CARRIED BY APIS MELLIFERA L. TRIGONA CARBONARIA SMITH AND VESPULA GERMANICA (F.) (HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE, VESPIDAE)

Harriss, F. C. L.; Beattie, Andrew J.

doi:10.1111/j.1440-6055.1991.tb02189.x

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We suggest two possible explanations for these differences in pollen viability between flies and bees. First pollen viability declines upon direct contact with some insects (Harriss & Beattie, 1991;Richards et al, 2005). For example, Richards et al (2005) demonstrated that Brassica napus pollen viability was significantly reduced when in contact with the proboscis of the moth Helicoverpa armigera.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pollen transport differs among bees and flies in a human‐modified landscape

Rader

Edwards

Westcott

et al. 2011

Diversity and Distributions

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Dispersal distances of insect pollinators are critical in defining their contribution to landscape‐wide pollen movement and ultimately gene flow in natural and agricultural systems. We ask whether bee and fly pollinator taxa differ in their dispersal distances and transport of viable pollen in a human‐modified system. Location Canterbury and Otago region, South Island, New Zealand. Methods We captured pollen‐carrying insects travelling outside of a model mass‐flowering agricultural crop, Brassica rapa, using insect flight intercept traps at five distances (0, 100, 200, 300 and 400 m) from the pollen source. We examined pollen loads and pollen viability to determine whether pollen transport distance and viability differ among pollinator taxa. Results A total of 5453 insects were collected of which 717 individuals from 26 insect taxa were positively identified as dispersing pollen up to 400 m from the source. These taxa consisted of four species from two bee families (Hymenoptera: Apidae and Halictidae), and eight species from four fly families (Diptera: Bibiondae, Stratiomyidae, Syrphidae and Tachinidae). Apidae generally carried higher pollen loads and more viable pollen than most fly taxa. Taxa in the fly families Stratiomyidae and Syrphidae, however, carried pollen to 400 m, which is further than both bee families. Main conclusions A diverse array of wild and managed flower visitors can transport viable pollen from a pollen source to at least 400 m. Knowledge of the differences in transport distances among generalist pollinators in human‐modified environments is crucial to understand the potential extent to which (1) pollen transport can facilitate gene flow and (2) unwanted hybridization may occur between crops and related weeds.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pollen transport differs among bees and flies in a human‐modified landscape

Rader

Edwards

Westcott

et al. 2011

Diversity and Distributions

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since these social insects live in moist, crowded nests they have developed glands that produce a volatile substance that kills fungal spores. This substance damages the plasma membrane of fungal spores but may also damage pollen , Mesquida & Renard 1989, Harris & Beattie 1991. Similarly, endozoochory is not without its dangers for seeds (Pakerman et al 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Types, evolution and significance of plant – animal interactions

Pacini

Viegi

Franchi

2008

Rend. Fis. Acc. Lincei

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interactions between plants and animals are analyzed starting from the advantages gained by animals and proceeding to those gained exclusively by plants. These interactions are essentially of five types: 1. predation of plants by animals; 2. benevolence of plants towards certain animals to prevent or reduce predation; 3. predation by plants (carnivorous plants); 4. symbiosis and mutualism; 5. seduction and deception of animals by plants for dispersal of plant reproductive structures. All types of plants are preyed on by animals, though from as far back in evolution as algae, certain plant molecules reduce or prevent predation. In the most primitive land plants, other types of interactions beneficial for plants are encountered. More evolved land plants (angiosperms) show all facets of the five types of interaction, whereas in prokaryotic and eukaryotic algae there is only predation and in some cases countermeasures to avoid it. An evolutionary path leading from predation, the original condition, to seduction, deception and carnivory, is also postulated.

show abstract

“…Entomophilous pollen is also affected by compounds that are secreted by the insect carrier (e.g. bees) [224][225][226]. Plants producing orthodox pollen are potentially out-crossing; both out-crossing and self-pollination can occur in these plant species, unless there is a self-incompatibility system in place to prevent self-pollination [227].…”

Section: Pollen Dehydration Presentation and Anther Dehiscence 91 mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Trials and Tribulations of the Plant Male Gametophyte — Understanding Reproductive Stage Stress Tolerance

Pacini¹

2016

Abiotic and Biotic Stress in Plants - Recent Advances and Future Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Yield and productivity of many crop species depend on successful reproductive development to produce seeds or fruits for human nutrition. Plants determine the right time to flower based on environmental cues (day length, temperature) and angiosperms have evolved a plethora of mechanisms to adapt flowering to specific environmental conditions. Despite these adaptation mechanisms, fertilisation and seed production remain subject to the reigning weather conditions before and during flowering. To fertilise the immobile female gametes inside the ovule, the male gametophytes need to be dispersed in a hostile environment. In crop plants, unexpected inclement weather conditions during male gametophyte development and pollen dispersal are often associated with dramatic yield losses. Molecular and physiological studies are gradually making progress in identifying genes and processes that control various aspects of pollen development, but the many intricacies involved in environmental control of pollen development and-in particular-regulation of male fertility remain poorly understood. The aim of this paper is to draw attention to the enormous amount of complexity and biodiversity that exist in angiosperm male gametophyte development. A better understanding of the strategies that exist in adapting pollen production and fertility to environmental challenges may ultimately benefit improvement of abiotic stress tolerance in major food crops.

show abstract

VIABILITY OF POLLEN CARRIED BY APIS MELLIFERA L. TRIGONA CARBONARIA SMITH AND VESPULA GERMANICA (F.) (HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE, VESPIDAE)

Cited by 16 publications

References 14 publications

Pollen transport differs among bees and flies in a human‐modified landscape

Pollen transport differs among bees and flies in a human‐modified landscape

Types, evolution and significance of plant – animal interactions

The Trials and Tribulations of the Plant Male Gametophyte — Understanding Reproductive Stage Stress Tolerance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About