Literature DB >> 24187032

Novel adaptation to hawkmoth pollinators in Clarkia reduces efficiency, not attraction of diurnal visitors.

Timothy J Miller1, Robert A Raguso, Kathleen M Kay.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Plant populations experiencing divergent pollination environments may be under selection to modify floral traits in ways that increase both attractiveness to and efficiency of novel pollinators. These changes may come at the cost of reducing overall effectiveness of other pollinators. The goal of this study was to examine differences in attractiveness and efficiency between Clarkia concinna and C. breweri, sister species of annual plants with parapatric distributions.
METHODS: An assessment was made as to whether observed differences in visitors between natural populations are driven by differences in floral traits or differences in the local pollination environment. Differences in floral attractiveness were quantified by setting out arrays of both species in the geographical range of each species and exposing both species to nocturnal hawkmoths (Hyles lineata) in flight cages. Differences in visitor efficiency were estimated by measuring stigma-visitor contact frequency and pollen loads for diurnal visitors, and pollen deposition on stigmas for hawkmoths. KEY
RESULTS: The composition of visitors to arrayed plants was similar between plant species at any particular site, but highly divergent among sites, and reflected differences in visitors to natural populations. Diurnal insects visited both species, but were more common at C. concinna populations. Hummingbirds and hawkmoths were only observed visiting within the range of C. breweri. Despite attracting similar species when artificially presented together, C. concinna and C. breweri showed large differences in pollinator efficiency. All visitors except hawkmoths pollinated C. concinna more efficiently.
CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the available pollinator community may play a larger role than differences in floral traits in determining visitors to natural populations of C. concinna and C. breweri. However, floral traits mediate differences in pollinator efficiency. Increased effectiveness of the novel hawkmoth pollinator on C. breweri comes at relatively little cost in attractiveness to other visitors, but at large cost in their efficiency as pollinators.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clarkia breweri; Clarkia concinna; Hyles lineata; floral traits; parapatric divergence; pollinator effectiveness; pollinator efficiency; pollinator shift; speciation

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24187032      PMCID: PMC3890391          DOI: 10.1093/aob/mct237

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Bot        ISSN: 0305-7364            Impact factor:   4.357


  38 in total

1.  Pollinator community structure and sources of spatial variation in plant--pollinator interactions in Clarkia xantiana ssp. xantiana.

Authors:  David A Moeller
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2004-08-26       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Variation among floral visitors in pollination ability: a precondition for mutualism specialization.

Authors:  D W Schemske; C C Horvitz
Journal:  Science       Date:  1984-08-03       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Pollination systems as isolating mechanisms in angiosperms.

Authors:  V GRANT
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1949-03       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 4.  Back to the past for pollination biology.

Authors:  Danny Kessler; Ian T Baldwin
Journal:  Curr Opin Plant Biol       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 7.834

5.  Insectivorous bat pollinates columnar cactus more effectively per visit than specialized nectar bat.

Authors:  Winifred F Frick; Ryan D Price; Paul A Heady; Kathleen M Kay
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 3.926

6.  Context-dependent pollinator behavior: an explanation for patterns of hybridization among three species of Indian paintbrush.

Authors:  Erika I Hersch; Bitty A Roy
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  Dark, bitter-tasting nectar functions as a filter of flower visitors in a bird-pollinated plant.

Authors:  Steven D Johnson; Anna L Hargreaves; Mark Brown
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.499

8.  Pollinator preference and the evolution of floral traits in monkeyflowers (Mimulus).

Authors:  D W Schemske; H D Bradshaw
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Evolution and coexistence of pollination ecotypes in an African Gladiolus (Iridaceae).

Authors:  Bruce Anderson; Ronny Alexandersson; Steven D Johnson
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2009-11-05       Impact factor: 3.694

10.  Flexible responses to visual and olfactory stimuli by foraging Manduca sexta: larval nutrition affects adult behaviour.

Authors:  Joaquín Goyret; Almut Kelber; Michael Pfaff; Robert A Raguso
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  9 in total

1.  Pollinator-driven ecological speciation in plants: new evidence and future perspectives.

Authors:  Timotheüs Van der Niet; Rod Peakall; Steven D Johnson
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.357

2.  Experimental sympatry reveals geographic variation in floral isolation by hawkmoths.

Authors:  Kathleen M Kay; Aubrey M Zepeda; Robert A Raguso
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 4.357

3.  Circadian rhythm of a Silene species favours nocturnal pollination and constrains diurnal visitation.

Authors:  Samuel Prieto-Benítez; Stefan Dötterl; Luis Giménez-Benavides
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 4.357

4.  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

5.  Herbivory as an important selective force in the evolution of floral traits and pollinator shifts.

Authors:  Tania Jogesh; Rick P Overson; Robert A Raguso; Krissa A Skogen
Journal:  AoB Plants       Date:  2016-12-22       Impact factor: 3.276

6.  A greenhouse experiment partially supports inferences of ecogeographic isolation from niche models of Clarkia sister species.

Authors:  Kaleb A Goff; Cormac Martinez Del Rio; Kathleen M Kay
Journal:  Am J Bot       Date:  2021-10-18       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  What Are the Best Pollinator Candidates for Camelia oleifera: Do Not Forget Hoverflies and Flies.

Authors:  Bin Yuan; Guan-Xing Hu; Xiao-Xiao Zhang; Jing-Kun Yuan; Xiao-Ming Fan; De-Yi Yuan
Journal:  Insects       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  The Influence of Prior Learning Experience on Pollinator Choice: An Experiment Using Bumblebees on Two Wild Floral Types of Antirrhinum majus.

Authors:  Coline C Jaworski; Christophe Andalo; Christine Raynaud; Valérie Simon; Christophe Thébaud; Jérôme Chave
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Butterflies visit more frequently, but bees are better pollinators: the importance of mouthpart dimensions in effective pollen removal and deposition.

Authors:  Beyte Barrios; Sean R Pena; Andrea Salas; Suzanne Koptur
Journal:  AoB Plants       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 3.276

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.