Pollination ecology in Centrosema brasilianum (L.) Benth. (Fabaceae: Papilionoideae): bee size influences pollen deposition
DOI:
10.46551/ruc.v26n2a4Palabras clave:
Bees; Flower; Pollination; PollenResumen
Here, were observed the interaction between Centrosema brasilianum (Fabaceae, Papilionoideae) and their floral visitors and quantified pollen removal and visitor traits. Aims: for to determine whether the behavior, quantity, and location of deposited pollen on the body of visiting bees differs according to the body size of bees. Methods: the morphological and behavioral attributes of floral and bees observed in interaction were measured in 20 individuals of C. brasilianum. The place of deposit and the amount of polinic charge in each bee were identified. The relationship between the attributes of the interactants and of pollen deposited was determined using simple linear models. Results: Bee behavior and pollen deposition on the body varied according to bee body size. Larger-sized bees with long tongues raised floral keels during visits and pollen deposition occurred on their heads and dorsal surfaces. Smaller individuals with short tongues did not raise the keel, and pollen was deposited on the dorsal surface, but mostly over the wings. Additionally, larger bees had twice as many pollen grains deposited on their body surfaces than smaller bees. Conclusions: we assumed that larger bees may provide a more effective pollination service than smaller bees in C. brasilianum. Implications: Future evaluations should be conducted that include more morphological and behavioral attributes in a larger sample number, which would provide a more nuanced understanding of pollination efficiency, the relationship between different behaviors and body sizes of bees, and the consequences of differential pollen deposition on the reproductive success of C. brasilianum.
Descargas
Citas
CORLETT, Richard T. Flower visitors and pollination in the Oriental (Indomalayan) Region. Biological Reviews, v. 79, n. 3, p. 497–532. 2004
NE’EMAN, Gigi et al. A framework for comparing pollinator performance: Effectiveness and efficiency. Biological Reviews, v. 85, n. 3, p. 435–451. 2010
KING, Caroline; BALLANTYNE, Gavin; WILLMER, Pat G. Why flower visitation is a poor proxy for pollination: measuring single‐visit pollen deposition, with implications for pollination networks and conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, v. 4, n. 9, p. 811-818, 2013.
WILLMER, Pat; FINLAYSON, Kathryn. Big bees do a better job: intraspecific size variation influences pollination effectiveness. Journal of Pollination Ecology, v. 14, p. 244-254, 2014. DOI:10.26786/1920-7603(2014)22
FÖLDESI Rita et al. Larger pollinators deposit more pollen on stigmas across multiple plant species – A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology, v. 58 n.4, p. 699–707, 2021.
INOUYE, D. W. The ecology of nectar robbing. The Biology of Nectaries. In The biology of nectaries. Eds B Bentley, T Elias. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 153–173, 1983.
HEDERSTRÖM, Veronica et al. Do plant ploidy and pollinator tongue length interact to cause low seed yield in red clover? Ecosphere, v. 12, n. 3, p. e03416, 2021.
PHILLIPS, Benjamin B. et al. Shared traits make flies and bees effective pollinators of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Basic and Applied Ecology, v. 32, p. 66-76, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2018.06.004
STAVERT, Jamie R. et al. Hairiness: the missing link between pollinators and pollination. PeerJ, v. 4, p. e2779, 2016.https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2779
CONNER, Jeffrey K.; DAVIS, Rachel; RUSH, Scott. The effect of wild radish floral morphology on pollination efficiency by four taxa of pollinators. Oecologia, v. 104, p. 234-245, 1995.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00328588
PARK, Mia G. et al. Per-visit pollinator performance and regional importance of wild Bombus and Andrena (Melandrena) compared to the managed honey bee in New York apple orchards. Apidologie, v. 47 n. 2, p. 145–160, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13592-015-0383-9
THOMSON, James D.; GOODELL, Karen. Pollen removal and deposition by honeybee and bumblebee visitors to apple and almond flowers. Journal of Applied ecology, v. 38 n. 5, p. 1032-1044, 2001.
MORRIS, William F.; VÁZQUEZ, Diego P.; CHACOFF, Natacha P. Benefit and cost curves for typical pollination mutualisms. Ecology, v. 91, n. 5, p. 1276-1285, 2010.
NATTERO, Julieta; COCUCCI, Andrea Aristides; MEDEL, R. Pollinator‐mediated selection in a specialized pollination system: matches and mismatches across populations. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, v. 23, n. 9, p. 1957-1968, 2010.
SOLÍS‐MONTERO, Lislie; VALLEJO‐MARÍN, Mario. Does the morphological fit between flowers and pollinators affect pollen deposition? An experimental test in a buzz‐pollinated species with anther dimorphism. Ecology and Evolution, v. 7, n. 8, p. 2706-2715, 2017.
OLLERTON, Jeff; WINFREE, Rachael; TARRANT, Sam. How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals?. Oikos, v. 120, n. 3, p. 321-326, 2011.
DAFNI, Amots; KEVAN, Peter G. Flower size and shape: implications in pollination. Israel Journal of Plant Sciences, v. 45, n. 2-3, p. 201-211, 1997.
BRUNET, Johanne et al. The effects of flower, floral display, and reward sizes on bumblebee foraging behavior when pollen is the reward and plants are dichogamous. International Journal of Plant Sciences, v. 176, n. 9, p. 811-819, 2015.
E‐VOJTKÓ, Anna et al. The neglected importance of floral traits in trait‐based plant community assembly. Journal of Vegetation Science, v. 31, n. 4, p. 529-539, 2020.DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12877
STOUT, Jane Catherine. Does size matter? Bumblebee behaviour and the pollination of Cytisus scoparius L.(Fabaceae). Apidologie, v. 31, n. 1, p. 129-139, 2000.
PEAT, James; TUCKER, James; GOULSON, Dave. Does intraspecific size variation in bumblebees allow colonies to efficiently exploit different flowers?. Ecological Entomology, v. 30, n. 2, p. 176-181, 2005.
LÁZARO, Amparo; HEGLAND, Stein Joar; TOTLAND, Ørjan. The relationships between floral traits and specificity of pollination systems in three Scandinavian plant communities. Oecologia, v. 157, p. 249-257, 2008.
ARMBRUSTER, W. Scott; MUCHHALA, Nathan. Associations between floral specialization and species diversity: cause, effect, or correlation?. Evolutionary Ecology, v. 23, p. 159-179, 2009.
ARMBRUSTER, W. Scott; MUCHHALA, Nathan. Associations between floral specialization and species diversity: cause, effect, or correlation?. Evolutionary Ecology, v. 23, p. 159-179, 2009.
ENDRESS, Peter K.; FRIIS, Else M. Early Evolution of Flowers. Vienna: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
CARDEL, Yuria J.; KOPTUR, Suzanne. Effects of florivory on the pollination of flowers: an experimental field study with a perennial plant. International Journal of Plant Sciences, v. 171, n. 3, p. 283-292, 2010.
AMARAL-NETO, Laércio P.; WESTERKAMP, Christian; MELO, Gabriel AR. From keel to inverted keel flowers: functional morphology of “upside down” papilionoid flowers and the behavior of their bee visitors. Plant Systematics and Evolution, v. 301, p. 2161-2178, 2015.
MAASS, Brigitte L.; TORRES GONZÁLEZ, Alba Marina. Outcrossing in the tropical forage legume Centrosema brasilianum (L.) Benth. Proc. XIIIth Eucarpia Congress. Angers, France, 1992.
WESTERKAMP, Christian; CLASSEN-BOCKHOFF, Regine. Bilabiate flowers: the ultimate response to bees?. Annals of botany, v. 100, n. 2, p. 361-374, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcm123.
ETCHEVERRY, Angela Virginia; VOGEL, Stefan. Interactions between the asymmetrical flower of Cochliasanthus caracalla (Fabaceae: Papilionoideae) with its visitors. Flora, v. 239, p. 141-150, 2018.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2017.10.006
ULUER, Deniz. A review for the pollinators of Papilionaceous flowers. Turkish Journal of Biodiversity, v. 4, n. 1, p. 36-52, 2021.
RAMALHO, Mauro; SILVA, Maise; CARVALHO, Gilson. Pollinator sharing in specialized bee pollination systems: a test with the synchronopatric lip flowers of Centrosema Benth (Fabaceae). Sociobiology, v. 61, n. 2, p. 189-197, 2014.
APONTE, Yannely; JÁUREGUI, Damelis. Morfoanatomía floral y algunos aspectos reproductivos de cinco especies de Centrosema (dc.) benth. (Fabaceae). Ernstia, v. 29 n. 2, p. 1-40, 2019.
FAEGRI, Knut; VAN DER PIJL, Leendert. The principles of pollination ecology. Pergamon Press. 1979.
CÓRDOBA, Silvina A.; COCUCCI, Andrea A. Flower power: its association with bee power and floral functional morphology in papilionate legumes. Annals of Botany, v. 108, n. 5, p. 919–931, 2011.
FRANKIE, G. W. et al. Characterstics and organization of the large bee pollination system in the Costa Rican dry forest. CABI Digital databases, p. 411-447, 1983. 19840215560
DANIELI‐SILVA, Aline et al. Do pollination syndromes cause modularity and predict interactions in a pollination network in tropical high‐altitude grasslands?. Oikos, v. 121, n. 1, p. 35-43, 2012.
FAEGRI, Knut; VAN DER PIJL, Leendert. Principles of pollination ecology. 2013.
FENSTER, Charles B. et al. Pollination syndromes and floral specialization. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., v. 35, p. 375-403, 2004.
FOX, John; WEISBERG, Sanford. An R Companion to Applied Regression, Third edition. Sage publications, Thousand Oaks CA. 2019 https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion/.
HARTIG, Florian. DHARMa: residual diagnostics for hierarchical (multi-level/mixed) regression models. R Packag version 020, 2018.
TEAM, R. Core. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2021. URL https://www.R-project.org/.
FRANKIE G. W. et al. Characteristics and organization of the large bee pollination system in the Costa Rican dry forest. In: Handbook of experimental pollination biology. Eds C Jones, R Little. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, p 411–447.
BORGES, Hélida Bruno Nogueira. Biologia reprodutiva de Centrosema pubescens Benth: (Fabaceae). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi2, v. 1, n. 1, p. 31–38, 2006.
LEPPIK, Elmar Emil. Floral evolution and pollination in the Leguminosae. In: Annales Botanici Fennici. Societas Zoologica Botanica Fennica Vanamo, v. 3, p. 299–308, 1966.
VALLEJO‐MARÍN, Mario et al. Division of labour within flowers: Heteranthery, a floral strategy to reconcile contrasting pollen fates. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, v. 22, n. 4, p. 828–839, 2009. DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01693.x
LUNAU, Klaus et al. Just spines—mechanical defense of malvaceous pollen against collection by corbiculate bees. Apidologie, v. 46, p. 144-149, 2015. DOI: 10.1007/s13592-014-0310-5
WESTERKAMP, Christian. Keel blossoms: bee flowers with adaptations against bees. Flora, v. 192, n. 2, p. 125-132, 1997.
PARKER, Ingrid M. et al. Pollination of Cytisus scoparius (Fabaceae) and Genista monspessulana (Fabaceae), two invasive shrubs in California. Madroño, v. 49, p. 25–32. 2002
BUCHMANN, Stephen L. et al. Buzz pollination in angiosperms. In: Handbook of experimental pollination biology. Eds CE Jones, RJ Little. New York; Scientific and Academic Editions, Van Reinhold, p. 73–113, 1983.
KOCH, Laura; LUNAU, Klaus; WESTER, Petra. To be on the safe site – Ungroomed spots on the bee’s body and their importance for pollination (Ed. RM Borges). PLOS ONE, v. 12, n. 9, p. e0182522. 2017.
DAFNI, A.; LEHRER, M.; KEVAN, P. G. Spatial flower parameters and insect spatial vision. Biological Reviews, v. 72, n. 2, p. 239-282, 1997.