Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:04:33.585Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Insect visitation rates and foraging patterns differ in androdioecious and hermaphrodite-only populations of Laguncularia racemosa (Combretaceae) in Florida

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2012

Carol L. Landry  and
Beverly J. Rathcke
Carol L. Landry
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Beverly J. Rathcke
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Insect-pollinated Laguncularia racemosa has a variable breeding system; some populations are androdioecious, with male and hermaphroditic plants, while others lack male plants. We observed the foraging behaviours of insects in three androdioecious and three hermaphrodite-only populations of L. racemosa in Florida. In each population, insect visitation rates were estimated from 30–108 timed intervals. We recorded the number of flowers visited by 144–224 insects during foraging bouts made to 15–40 male and hermaphroditic plants. Male plants in androdioecious populations had significantly more visitors than hermaphroditic plants, increasing the number of vectors carrying pollen from male plants. Further, many insects visited few flowers during foraging bouts, which should increase outcrossing frequency. According to mathematical models, male plants benefit from these combined factors. Plants in hermaphrodite-only populations had significantly more visitors than hermaphroditic plants in androdioecious populations. Proportionately more insects visited many flowers during foraging bouts in hermaphrodite-only versus androdioecious populations. The increased likelihood of geitonogamous self-pollination could help explain the lack of male plants in hermaphrodite-only populations. Differences in pollinator assemblages and the relative abundances of several species were responsible for differences in foraging behaviours: Apis mellifera, Bombus sp., Melissodes sp., Xylocopa sp., Euodynerus sp. and a calliphorid species.

Keywords

androdioecyApis melliferabehaviourgeitonogamyhoney beeinsect pollinationLaguncularia racemosamale fitness
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , July 2012 , pp. 343 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

ALONSO, C., MUTIKAINEN, P. & HERRARA, C. M. 2007. Ecological context of breeding system variation: sex, size and pollination in a (predominantly) gynodioecious shrub. Annals of Botany 100:1547–1556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ASHMAN, T.-L., KNIGHT, T. M., STEETS, J. A., AMARASEKARE, P., BURD, M., CAMPBELL, D. R., DUDASH, M. R., JOHNSTON, M. O., MAZER, S. J., MITCHELL, R. J., MORGAN, M. T. & WILSON, W. G. 2004. Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85:2408–2421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BARRETT, S. C. H. 2003. Mating strategies in flowering plants: the outcrossing-selfing paradigm and beyond. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B) 358:991–1004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BARRETT, S. C. H. & ECKERT, C. G. 1990. Variation and evolution of mating systems in seed plants. Pp. 229–254 in Kawano, S. (ed.). Biological approaches and evolutionary trends in plants. Academic Press Inc., San Diego.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BORKENT, C. J. & HARDER, L. D. 2007. Flies (Diptera) as pollinators of two dioecious plants: behaviour and implications for plant mating. Canadian Entomologist 139:235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BRECHBUHL, R., KROPF, C. & BACHER, S. 2010. Impact of flower-dwelling crab spiders on plant–pollinator mutualisms. Basic and Applied Ecology 11:76–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CHARLESWORTH, D. 1984. Androdioecy and the evolution of dioecy. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 23:333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DARWIN, C. 1888. The different forms of flowers on plants of the same species. John Murray, London. 352 pp.Google Scholar
GHAZOUL, J., LISTON, K. A. & BOYLE, T. J. 1998. Disturbance-induced density-dependent seed set in Shorea siamensis (Dipterocarpaceae), a tropical forest tree. Journal of Ecology 86:462–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARDER, L. D. & BARRETT, S. C. H. 1996. Pollen dispersal and mating patterns in animal-pollinated plants. Pp. 140–190 in Lloyd, D. G. & Barrett, S. C. H. (eds.). Floral biology: studies on floral evolution in animal-pollinated plants. Chapman and Hall, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HOUSE, S. M. 1989. Pollen movement to flowering canopies of pistillate individuals of three rain forest tree species in tropical Australia. Australian Journal of Ecology 14:77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HUSBAND, B. C. & SCHEMSKE, D. W. 1996. Evolution of the magnitude and timing of inbreeding depression in plants. Evolution 50:54–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ISHIDA, K. & HIURA, T. 2002. Mating system and population genetic structure of an androdioecious tree, Fraxinus lanuginosa Koidz. (Oleaceae) in northern Japan. Heredity 88:296–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
KARRON, J. D., HOLMQUIST, K. G., FLANAGAN, R. J. & MITCHELL, R. J. 2009. Pollinator visitation patterns strongly influence among-flower variation in selfing rate. Annals of Botany 103:1379–1383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LANDRY, C. L. 2005. Androdioecy in white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa): maintenance of a rare breeding system through plant–pollinator interactions. PhD thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.Google Scholar
LANDRY, C. L. 2011. Changes in the pollination ecology of white mangrove following Hurricane Wilma (2005). Pp. 77–85 in Cole, E. & Baxter, J. (eds.). Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on the Natural History of the Bahamas. Gerace Research Centre, San Salvador, Bahamas.Google Scholar
LANDRY, C. L. & RATHCKE, B. J. 2007. Do inbreeding depression and relative male fitness explain the maintenance of androdioecy in white mangrove, Laguncularia racemosa (Combretaceae)? New Phytologist 176:891–901.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LANDRY, C. L., RATHCKE, B. J., KASS, L. B., ELLIOTT, N. B. & BOOTHE, R. 2005. Flower visitors to White Mangrove: a comparison between three Bahamian islands and Florida. Pp. 84–94 in Buckner, S. & McGrath, T. (eds.). Proceedings of the Tenth Symposium on the Natural History of the Bahamas. Gerace Research Center, San Salvador Island, Bahamas.Google Scholar
LANDRY, C. L., RATHCKE, B. J. & KASS, L. B. 2009. Distribution of androdioecious and hermaphroditic populations of the mangrove Laguncularia racemosa (Combretaceae) in Florida and the Bahamas. Journal of Tropical Ecology 25:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LISTON, A., RIESEBERG, L. H. & ELIAS, T. S. 1990. Datisca glomerata is functionally androdioecious. Nature 343:641–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LLOYD, D. G. 1975. The maintenance of gynodioecy and androdioecy in angiosperms. Genetica 45:325–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PANNELL, J. 1997. Widespread functional androdioecy in Mercurialis annua L. (Euphorbiaceae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 61:95–116.Google Scholar
RATHCKE, B. J., KASS, L. B. & ELLIOTT, N. B. 2001. Flower visitors to black mangrove and white mangrove on San Salvador Island, Bahamas. Pp. 68–77 in Clark-Simpson, C. & Smith, G. (eds.). Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on the Natural History of the Bahamas. Gerace Research Center, San Salvador Island, Bahamas.Google Scholar
SATO, H. 2002. Invasion of unisexuals in hermaphrodite populations of animal-pollinated plants: effects of pollination ecology and floral size-number trade-offs. Evolution 56:2374–2382.Google ScholarPubMed
SCRIBAILO, R. W. & BARRETT, S. C. H. 1994. Effects of prior self-pollination on outcrossed seed set in tristylous Pontederia sagittata (Pontederiaceae). Sexual Plant Reproduction 7:273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SNOW, A. A., SPIRA, T. P., SIMPSON, R. & KLIPS, R. A. 1996. The ecology of geitonogamous pollination. Pp. 191–216 in Lloyd, D. G. & Barrett, S. C. H. (eds.). Floral biology: studies on floral evolution in animal-pollinated plants. Chapman and Hall, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TOMLINSON, P. B. 1994. The botany of mangroves. Cambridge University Press, New York. 441 pp.Google Scholar
WHELAN, R. J., AYRE, D. J. & BEYNON, F. M. 2009. The birds and the bees: pollinator behaviour and variation in the mating system of the rare shrub Grevillea macleayana. Annals of Botany 103:1395–1401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WILLSON, M. F. 1983. Plant reproductive ecology. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 292 pp.Google Scholar