Summary
In field experiments withAralia hispida inflorescences, the following variables were manipulated: number of umbels per inflorescence, number of flowers per umbel, and amounts of pollen and nectar per flower. Visitation rates by bumble bees, the principal pollinators, were then observed. In the reward-variation experiments, bees appeared to learn the positions of nectar-rich shoots, and visited them significantly more often than nectar-poor shoots. They did not respond to similar variation in pollen production. The nectar preferences developed slowly after the treatments were imposed, and bees continued to favor sites that had been occupied by nectar-rich shoots even after the treatments were discontinued. Visitation rate was approximately proportional to flower number, making it unlikely that increases in inflorescence size produced a disproportionate gain in male reproductive success (a necessary condition in certain models for the evolution of dioecy). For a fixed number of flowers per inflorescence, bees preferred inflorescences with more umbels. In pairwise choice tests of male-phase and female-phase umbels of various sizes, bees preferred male-phase umbels and larger umbels; the preference for male-phase umbels is stronger in bees that had previously fed on male-phase umbels.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bawa, K. S. (1980) Evolution of dioecy in flowering plants.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 15–40.
Bawa, K. S. and Beach, J. H. (1981) Evolution of sexual systems in flowering plants.Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden,68, 254–74.
Beach, J. H. (1981) Pollinator foraging and the evolution of dioecy.Amer. Natur. 118, 572–7.
Bell, G. (1985) On the function of flowers.Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 224, 233–65.
Bertin, R. I. (1987) Paternity in plants. InPlant Reproductive Strategies (J. Lovett Doust and L. Lovett Doust, eds) Oxford University Press. In Press.
Bierzychudek, P. (1981) Pollinator limitation of plant reproductive effort.Amer. Natur. 117, 838–40.
Charlesworth, D. (1984) Androdioecy and the evolution of dioecy.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. London22, 333–46.
Charlesworth, D. and Charlesworth B. (1981) Allocation of resources to male and female functions in hermaphrodites.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. London15, 57–74.
Charnov, E. L. (1982)The Theory of Sex Allocation. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Cruden, R. W. and Hermann-Parker, S. M. (1977) Temporal dioecism: an alternative to dioecism.Evolution 31, 863–6.
Faegri, K. and van der Pijl, L. (1979)The Principles of Pollination Ecology. Pergamon. Oxford.
Fienberg, S. E. (1980)The Analysis of Cross-classified Categorical Data. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 198 pp.
Fretwell, S. (1972)Populations in a Seasonal Environment. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Harder, L. D., Thomson, J. D., Cruzan, M. B. and Unnasch, R. S. (1985) Sexual reproduction and variation in floral morphology in an ephemeral vernal lily,Erythronium americanum. Oecologia67, 286–91.
Hartling, L. K. and Plowright, R. C. (1979) An investigation of inter- and intra-inflorescence visitation rates by bumble bees on red clover with special reference to seed set.Proc. IVth Int. Symp. on Pollination. Maryland Agric. Exp. Station Spec. Misc. Publ. No. 1, 457–60.
Heinrich, B. (1979a)Bumblebee Economics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Heinrich, B. (1979b) Resource heterogeneity and patterns of movement in foraging bumblebees.Oecologia 40, 235–45.
Lloyd, D. G. (1982) Selection of combined versus separate sexes in seed plants.Amer. Natur. 120, 571–83.
Lloyd, D. G. (1984) Gender allocations in outcrossing cosexual plants. InPerspective son Plant Population Ecology (R. Dirzo and J. Sarukhan, eds) pp. 227–300. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass. 01375.
Moermond, T. C. and Denslow, J. S. (1983) Fruit choice in neotropical birds: effects of fruit type and accessibility on selectivity.J. Anim. Ecol. 52, 407–20.
Morse, D. H. (1980) The effect of nectar abundance on foraging patterns of bumble bees.Ecol. Ent. 5, 53–9.
Muenchow, G. (1987) Is dioecy associated with fleshy fruit?Am. J. Bot. 74, 287–93.
Schaffer, W. M. and Schaffer, M. V. (1979) The adaptive significance of variations in reproductive habit in the Agavaceae II: pollination foraging behavior and selection for increased reproductive expenditure.Ecology 60, 1051–69.
Schemske, D. W. (1980) Evolution of floral display in the orchidBrassavola nodosa. Evolution34, 489–93.
Stanton, M. L., Snow, A. A. and Handel, S. N. (1986) Floral evolution: attractiveness to pollinators increases male fitness.Science 232, 1625–6.
Thomson, J. D. (1986) Pollen transport and deposition by bumble bees inErythronium: influences of floral nectar and bee grooming.J. Ecol. 74, 329–41.
Thomson, J. D. and Barrett, S. C. H. (1981a) Temporal variation of gender inAralia hispida Vent. (Araliaceae).Evolution 35, 1094–1107.
Thomson, J. D. and Barrett, S. C. H. (1981b) Selection for outcrossing, sexual selection, and the evolution of dioecy in plants.Amer. Natur. 118, 443–9.
Thomson, J. D., Maddison, W. P. and Plowright, R. C. (1982) Behavior of bumble bee pollinators ofAralia hispida Vent. (Araliaceae).Oecologia 54, 326–336.
Thomson, J. D., Peterson, S. C. and Harder, L. D. (1987) Response of traplining bumble bees to competition experiments: shifts in feeding location and efficiency.Oecologia 71, 295–300.
Thorpe, R. W., Briggs, D. L., Estes, J. R. and Erikson, E. H. (1975) Nectar fluorescence under ultraviolet irradiation.Science 189, 476–8.
Waddington, K. D. and Heinrich, B. (1981) Patterns of movement and floral choice by foraging bees. InForaging Behavior: Ecological, Ethological, and Psychological Approaches (A. Kamil and T. Sargent, eds). Garland STPM Press, NY.
Willson, M. F. (1979) Sexual selection in plants.Amer. Natur. 113, 777–90.
Willson, M. F. and Price, P. W. (1977) The evolution of inflorescence size inAsclepias (Asclepiadaceae).Evolution 31, 495–511.
Wyatt, R. (1982) Inflorescence architecture: how flower number, arrangement, and phenology affect pollination and fruit-set.Amer. J. Bot. 69, 585–94.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thomson, J.D. Effects of variation in inflorescence size and floral rewards on the visitation rates of traplining pollinators ofAralia hispida . Evol Ecol 2, 65–76 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02071589
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02071589