Roxane Delle-Vedove1, Bertrand Schatz2, Mathilde Dufay1. 1. Universite de Lille, CNRS UMR 8198 Evo-Eco-Paleo, 59655 Villeneuve d'Ascq Cedex, France. 2. CEFE (Centre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive), UMR 5175, CNRS, Université de Montpellier, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier, EPHE, 1919 route de Mende, 34293 Montpellier, France.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Among the various floral traits involved in pollinator attraction and potentially under selection mediated by pollinators, floral scent/fragrance has been less investigated than other components of floral phenotype. Whether or not pollinator-mediated selection impacts floral scents depends on the heritability of scent/fragrance and the occurrence of some variation within species. Although most studies have investigated how scent varies among species, growing amounts of data are available on variation at the intraspecific level. Methods: The results of 81 studies investigating intraspecific variation of floral scents in 132 taxa were reviewed. For each study, whether variation was found in either identity, proportion or absolute quantities of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was recorded, as well as information with the potential to explain variation, such as methodology, plant origin or pollination biology. Key Results: Variation was found for almost all investigated species, both among individuals (among and sometimes within populations) and within individuals across different temporal scales. Cases in which such variation is a possible result of pollinator-mediated selection were analysed, by discussing separately selection related to variation in pollinator identity/behaviour among populations or across time, deceit pollination and sex-specific selection. Not surprisingly, in many cases, pollinator-mediated selection alone does not explain the observed variation in floral scent. This led us to review current knowledge on less investigated factors, such as selection mediated by natural enemies, genetic drift and gene flow, environmental constraints, phylogenetic inertia, or biochemical constraints that could be invoked to explain scent variation. Conclusions: This review highlights the great potential of analysing floral scent variation and including it in integrated studies of floral phenotypes. We also have identified the current gaps in our understanding of this complex signal and we propose several methodological and conceptual future directions in this research area.
Background and Aims: Among the various floral traits involved in pollinator attraction and potentially under selection mediated by pollinators, floral scent/fragrance has been less investigated than other components of floral phenotype. Whether or not pollinator-mediated selection impacts floral scents depends on the heritability of scent/fragrance and the occurrence of some variation within species. Although most studies have investigated how scent varies among species, growing amounts of data are available on variation at the intraspecific level. Methods: The results of 81 studies investigating intraspecific variation of floral scents in 132 taxa were reviewed. For each study, whether variation was found in either identity, proportion or absolute quantities of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was recorded, as well as information with the potential to explain variation, such as methodology, plant origin or pollination biology. Key Results: Variation was found for almost all investigated species, both among individuals (among and sometimes within populations) and within individuals across different temporal scales. Cases in which such variation is a possible result of pollinator-mediated selection were analysed, by discussing separately selection related to variation in pollinator identity/behaviour among populations or across time, deceit pollination and sex-specific selection. Not surprisingly, in many cases, pollinator-mediated selection alone does not explain the observed variation in floral scent. This led us to review current knowledge on less investigated factors, such as selection mediated by natural enemies, genetic drift and gene flow, environmental constraints, phylogenetic inertia, or biochemical constraints that could be invoked to explain scent variation. Conclusions: This review highlights the great potential of analysing floral scent variation and including it in integrated studies of floral phenotypes. We also have identified the current gaps in our understanding of this complex signal and we propose several methodological and conceptual future directions in this research area.
Authors: Robert A Raguso; Rachel A Levin; Susan E Foose; Meredith W Holmberg; Lucinda A McDade Journal: Phytochemistry Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.072
Authors: Lindsey L Bechen; Matthew G Johnson; Geoffrey T Broadhead; Rachel A Levin; Rick P Overson; Tania Jogesh; Jeremie B Fant; Robert A Raguso; Krissa A Skogen; Norman J Wickett Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2022-02-12 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Edyta Jermakowicz; Joanna Leśniewska; Marcin Stocki; Aleksandra M Naczk; Agata Kostro-Ambroziak; Artur Pliszko Journal: Biology (Basel) Date: 2022-04-21
Authors: Eva Gfrerer; Danae Laina; Marc Gibernau; Roman Fuchs; Martin Happ; Till Tolasch; Wolfgang Trutschnig; Anja C Hörger; Hans Peter Comes; Stefan Dötterl Journal: Front Plant Sci Date: 2021-09-24 Impact factor: 5.753