Pollinators of an endemic and endangered species, Mammillaria gaumeri (Cactaceae), in its natural habitat (coastal dune) and in a botanical garden.

Mammillaria gaumeri (Britton & Ross) Orcutt (Cactaceae), an endemic plant of the Yucatan Peninsula, is included by the Mexican government in the list of species that require special protection. Its natural habitat is now restricted to fragmented areas and protection programs involve botanical gardens in growing individuals rescued from disturbed areas. Little information is available on the reproductive characteristics of this species and nothing is known of its pollinators. We investigated the visitors of M. gaumeri flowers, collecting and observing bee species in its natural habitat (i.e., coastal dune) and in a botanical garden, where coastal dune vegetation had been created. Observations were made on plants whose density was artificially increased by grouping flowering individuals. At each site, we: 1) collected insects visiting the flowers; 2) recorded number of visits; and 3) video-recorded bee movements on the flowers. As expected, the number of bee species and visitation frequency were higher at the botanical garden than at the coastal dune. After landing on a flower, bees either inspected the anthers or dived among them. These behaviors, carried out by all observed species, seemed related to the state of the anthers (full or empty of pollen) and stigma lobes (opened or closed). Specifically, visits lasted longer when anthers were full of pollen and stigma lobes were opened. The same bee species recorded on the dune were also recorded at the botanical garden, suggesting that the artificial dune at the botanical garden offered suitable conditions for the natural pollinators of this endangered cactus.

The Relevance Framework for Category-Based Induction: Evidence From Garden-Path Arguments

Relevance theory (Sperber & Wilson. 1995) suggests that people expend cognitive effort when processing information in proportion to the cognitive effects to be gained from doing so. This theory has been used to explain how people apply their knowledge appropriately when evaluating category-based inductive arguments (Medin, Coley, Storms, & Hayes, 2003). In such arguments, people are told that a property is true of premise categories and are asked to evaluate the likelihood that it is also true of conclusion categories. According to the relevance framework, reasoners generate hypotheses about the relevant relation between the categories in the argument. We reasoned that premises inconsistent with early hypotheses about the relevant relation would have greater effects than consistent premises. We designed three premise garden-path arguments where the same 3rd premise was either consistent or inconsistent with likely hypotheses about the relevant relation. In Experiments 1 and 2, we showed that effort expended processing consistent premises (measured via reading times) was significantly less than effort expended on inconsistent premises. In Experiment 2 and 3, we demonstrated a direct relation between cognitive effect and cognitive effort. For garden-path arguments, belief change given inconsistent 3rd premises was significantly correlated with Premise 3 (Experiment 3) and conclusion (Experiments 2 and 3) reading times. For consistent arguments, the correlation between belief change and reading times did not approach significance. These results support the relevance framework for induction but are difficult to accommodate under other approaches.