Literature DB >> 18283497

Combined effects of inflorescence architecture, display size, plant density and empty flowers on bumble bee behaviour: experimental study with artificial inflorescences.

Hiroshi S Ishii1, Yuimi Hirabayashi, Gaku Kudo.   

Abstract

Pollen dispersal by pollinators is governed by the extent to which diverse effects on pollinator behaviour act independently or augment or moderate each other. Using artificial inflorescences, we assessed the behavioural responses of bumble bees to inflorescence architecture (raceme, panicle, and umbel), inflorescence size (7 or 13 flowers), inter-inflorescence distance and the proportion of empty flowers per inflorescence. The advantage of large inflorescences in terms of attractiveness was larger for racemes and umbels than for panicles, whereas the effect of inter-inflorescence distance on the number of successive probes was smaller for racemes than for panicles and umbels. The number of flowers probed per visit increased almost proportionally with display size when fewer flowers were empty, whereas the number increased less when many flowers were empty. Our results suggest that display size and the spatial arrangement of flowers and nectar within inflorescences can contribute to efficient pollination by affecting pollinator behaviour interactively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18283497     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-008-0991-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  10 in total

1.  The evolution of empty flowers revisited.

Authors:  Ann Smithson; Luc D B Gigord
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2003-03-28       Impact factor: 3.926

2.  Nectarless flowers: ecological correlates and evolutionary stability.

Authors:  Juilee D Thakar; Krushnamegh Kunte; Anisha K Chauhan; Aparna V Watve; Milind G Watve
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2003-06-28       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Manipulation of bee behavior by inflorescence architecture and its consequences for plant mating.

Authors:  Crispin Y Jordan; Lawrence D Harder
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2006-03-07       Impact factor: 3.926

4.  Evolution and development of inflorescence architectures.

Authors:  Przemyslaw Prusinkiewicz; Yvette Erasmus; Brendan Lane; Lawrence D Harder; Enrico Coen
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-05-24       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Floral arrangements and hummingbird feeding.

Authors:  F Reed Hainsworth; Theresa Mercier; Larry L Wolf
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  FLORAL SEX ALLOCATION IN SEQUENTIALLY BLOOMING PLANTS.

Authors:  Johanne Brunet; Deborah Charlesworth
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  EVOLUTION OF INFLORESCENCE DESIGN: THEORY AND DATA.

Authors:  Mark Fishbein; D Lawrence Venable
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 3.694

8.  Foraging bumblebees avoid flowers already visited by conspecifics or by other bumblebee species

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 2.844

9.  POLLINATOR FORAGING ON FOXGLOVE (DIGITALIS PURPUREA): A TEST OF A NEW MODEL.

Authors:  Lynn S Best; Paulette Bierzychudek
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 3.694

10.  Optimal foraging, plant density and the marginal value theorem.

Authors:  Michael Zimmerman
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1981-05       Impact factor: 3.225

  10 in total
  15 in total

1.  Longer visits on familiar plants? Testing a regular visitor's tendency to probe more flowers than occasional visitors.

Authors:  Takashi T Makino
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2013-06-21

2.  Delayed response in a plant-pollinator system to experimental grassland fragmentation.

Authors:  Hans-Peter Rusterholz; Bruno Baur
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2010-02-13       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 3.  The interplay between inflorescence development and function as the crucible of architectural diversity.

Authors:  Lawrence D Harder; Przemyslaw Prusinkiewicz
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 4.357

4.  Flower orientation influences the consistency of bumblebee movement within inflorescences.

Authors:  Crispin Y Jordan; Marc Natta; Lawrence D Harder
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2016-07-17       Impact factor: 4.357

5.  Pollinator-mediated competition between two co-flowering Neotropical mangrove species, Avicennia germinans (Avicenniaceae) and Laguncularia racemosa (Combretaceae).

Authors:  C L Landry
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 4.357

6.  Pollination system and the effect of inflorescence size on fruit set in the deceptive orchid Cephalanthera falcata.

Authors:  Kenji Suetsugu; Risa S Naito; Shigeki Fukushima; Atsushi Kawakita; Makoto Kato
Journal:  J Plant Res       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 2.629

7.  What makes a fig: insights from a comparative analysis of inflorescence morphogenesis in Moraceae.

Authors:  Viviane Gonçalves Leite; Finn Kjellberg; Rodrigo Augusto Santinelo Pereira; Simone Pádua Teixeira
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 4.357

8.  How scent and nectar influence floral antagonists and mutualists.

Authors:  Danny Kessler; Mario Kallenbach; Celia Diezel; Eva Rothe; Mark Murdock; Ian T Baldwin
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  Making the most of your pollinators: An epiphytic fig tree encourages its pollinators to roam between figs.

Authors:  Siti Khairiyah Mohd Hatta; Rupert J Quinnell; Abd Ghani Idris; Stephen G Compton
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 2.912

10.  Change of floral orientation within an inflorescence affects pollinator behavior and pollination efficiency in a bee-pollinated plant, Corydalis sheareri.

Authors:  Hui Wang; Shuang Tie; Dan Yu; You-Hao Guo; Chun-Feng Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.