309 resultados para pollinators
Resumo:
P>1. Ants show complex interactions with plants, both facultative and mutualistic, ranging from grazers through seed predators and dispersers to herders of some herbivores and guards against others. But ants are rarely pollinators, and their visits to flowers may be detrimental to plant fitness. 2. Plants therefore have various strategies to control ant distributions, and restrict them to foliage rather than flowers. These 'filters' may involve physical barriers on or around flowers, or 'decoys and bribes' sited on the foliage (usually extrafloral nectaries - EFNs). Alternatively, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are used as signals to control ant behaviour, attracting ants to leaves and/or deterring them from functional flowers. Some of the past evidence that flowers repel ants by VOCs has been equivocal and we describe the shortcomings of some experimental approaches, which involve behavioural tests in artificial conditions. 3. We review our previous study of myrmecophytic acacias, which used in situ experiments to show that volatiles derived from pollen can specifically and transiently deter ants during dehiscence, the effects being stronger in ant-guarded species and more effective on resident ants, both in African and Neotropical species. In these plants, repellence involves at least some volatiles that are known components of ant alarm pheromones, but are not repellent to beneficial bee visitors. 4. We also present new evidence of ant repellence by VOCs in temperate flowers, which is usually pollen-based and active on common European ants. We use these data to indicate that across a wide range of plants there is an apparent trade-off in ant-controlling filter strategies between the use of defensive floral volatiles and the alternatives of decoying EFNs or physical barriers.
Resumo:
1. Fig trees (Ficus) are pollinated only by agaonid wasps, whose larvae also gall fig ovules. Each ovule develops into either a seed (when pollinated) or a wasp (when an egg is also laid inside) but not both. 2. Ovipositing wasps (foundresses) favour ovules near the centre of the enclosed inflorescence (syconium or 'fig'), leaving ovules near the outer wall to develop into seeds. This spatial stratification of wasps and seeds ensures reproduction in both partners, and thereby enables mutualism persistence. However, the mechanism(s) responsible remain(s) unknown. 3. Theory shows that foundresses will search for increasingly rare inner ovules and ignore outer ovules, as long as ovipositing in outer ovules is sufficiently slow and/or if inner ovules confer greater fitness to wasps. The fig-pollinator mutualism can therefore be stabilized by strong time constraints on foundresses and by offspring fitness gradients over variation in ovule position. 4. Female fig wasps cannot leave their galls without male assistance. We found that females in outer ovules were unlikely to be released. Inner ovules thus have added value to foundresses, because their female offspring are more likely to mate and disperse. 5. For those offspring that did emerge, gall position (inner/outer) and body size did not influence the order in which female pollinators exited syconia, nor did early emerging wasps enjoy increased life spans. 6. We also found that the life spans of female wasps nearly doubled when given access to moisture. We suggest that conflict resolution in the fig-pollinator mutualism may thus be influenced by tropical seasonality, because wasps may be less able to over-exploit ovules in dry periods due to time constraints.
Resumo:
Mutualisms are interspecific interactions in which both players benefit. Explaining their maintenance is problematic, because cheaters should outcompete cooperative conspecifics, leading to mutualism instability. Monoecious figs (Ficus) are pollinated by host-specific wasps (Agaonidae), whose larvae gall ovules in their "fruits'' (syconia). Female pollinating wasps oviposit directly into Ficus ovules from inside the receptive syconium. Across Ficus species, there is a widely documented segregation of pollinator galls in inner ovules and seeds in outer ovules. This pattern suggests that wasps avoid, or are prevented from ovipositing into, outer ovules, and this results in mutualism stability. However, the mechanisms preventing wasps from exploiting outer ovules remain unknown. We report that in Ficus rubiginosa, offspring in outer ovules are vulnerable to attack by parasitic wasps that oviposit from outside the syconium. Parasitism risk decreases towards the centre of the syconium, where inner ovules provide enemy-free space for pollinator offspring. We suggest that the resulting gradient in offspring viability is likely to contribute to selection on pollinators to avoid outer ovules, and by forcing wasps to focus on a subset of ovules, reduces their galling rates. This previously unidentified mechanism may therefore contribute to mutualism persistence independent of additional factors that invoke plant defences against pollinator oviposition, or physiological constraints on pollinators that prevent oviposition in all available ovules.
Resumo:
In this preliminary study, the reproductive phenology of two monoecious fig species, Ficus racemosa and F. rubiginosa, was examined in tropical Australia. Syconia (inflorescences) occurred on both species all year round, but pre-floral and interfloral syconia were much commoner than the wasp-receptive and wasp-emitting phases in both species. The temporal overlap of the wasp-receptive and wasp-emitting phases on a single tree indicated that self-pollination was possible in both species and that pollinators may sometimes persist through multiple generations on one tree. This sexual phase overlap was commoner in F. rubiginosa than in F racemosa. The two species also differed in their general within-tree asynchrony, with a higher diversity of phases on F. rubiginosa than on F. racemosa. The time from syconium initiation to ripening was very similar in F. rubiginosa (mean = 48.51 days) and F. racemosa (mean = 43.53 days). However, there was much more variation within and between trees for F. rubiginosa. In addition, the wasp-receptive phase was found to last up to 5 days (rnean = 4.38) in F. rubiginosa. Such longevity should contribute substantially to local pollinator population persistence. Future work should use genetic studies to determine whether self-pollination is common in these fig species.
Resumo:
Pollinators are a key component of global biodiversity, providing vital ecosystem services to crops and wild plants. There is clear evidence of recent declines in both wild and domesticated pollinators, and parallel declines in the plants that rely upon them. Here we describe the nature and extent of reported declines, and review the potential drivers of pollinator loss, including habitat loss and fragmentation, agrochemicals, pathogens, alien species, climate change and the interactions between them. Pollinator declines can result in loss of pollination services which have important negative ecological and economic impacts that could significantly affect themaintenance of wild plant diversity, wider ecosystemstability, crop production, food security and human welfare.
Resumo:
Measuring pollinator performance has become increasingly important with emerging needs for risk assessment in conservation and sustainable agriculture that require multi-year and multi-site comparisons across studies. However, comparing pollinator performance across studies is difficult because of the diversity of concepts and disparate methods in use. Our review of the literature shows many unresolved ambiguities. Two different assessment concepts predominate: the first estimates stigmatic pollen deposition and the underlying pollinator behaviour parameters, while the second estimates the pollinator’s contribution to plant reproductive success, for example in terms of seed set. Both concepts include a number of parameters combined in diverse ways and named under a diversity of synonyms and homonyms. However, these concepts are overlapping because pollen deposition success is the most frequently used proxy for assessing the pollinator’s contribution to plant reproductive success. We analyse the diverse concepts and methods in the context of a new proposed conceptual framework with a modular approach based on pollen deposition, visit frequency, and contribution to seed set relative to the plant’s maximum female reproductive potential. A system of equations is proposed to optimize the balance between idealised theoretical concepts and practical operational methods. Our framework permits comparisons over a range of floral phenotypes, and spatial and temporal scales, because scaling up is based on the same fundamental unit of analysis, the single visit.
Resumo:
Background Figs and fig-pollinating wasp species usually display a highly specific one-to-one association. However, more and more studies have revealed that the "one-to-one" rule has been broken. Co-pollinators have been reported, but we do not yet know how they evolve. They may evolve from insect speciation induced or facilitated by Wolbachia which can manipulate host reproduction and induce reproductive isolation. In addition, Wolbachia can affect host mitochondrial DNA evolution, because of the linkage between Wolbachia and associated mitochondrial haplotypes, and thus confound host phylogeny based on mtDNA. Previous research has shown that fig wasps have the highest incidence of Wolbachia infection in all insect taxa, and Wolbachia may have great influence on fig wasp biology. Therefore, we look forward to understanding the influence of Wolbachia on mitochondrial DNA evolution and speciation in fig wasps. Results We surveyed 76 pollinator wasp specimens from nine Ficus microcarpa trees each growing at a different location in Hainan and Fujian Provinces, China. We found that all wasps were morphologically identified as Eupristina verticillata, but diverged into three clades with 4.22-5.28% mtDNA divergence and 2.29-20.72% nuclear gene divergence. We also found very strong concordance between E. verticillata clades and Wolbachia infection status, and the predicted effects of Wolbachia on both mtDNA diversity and evolution by decreasing mitochondrial haplotypes. Conclusions Our study reveals that the pollinating wasp E. verticillata on F. microcarpa has diverged into three cryptic species, and Wolbachia may have a role in this divergence. The results also indicate that Wolbachia strains infecting E. verticillata have likely resulted in selective sweeps on host mitochondrial DNA.
Resumo:
Lifetime reproductive success in female insects is often egg- or time-limited. For instance in pro-ovigenic species, when oviposition sites are abundant, females may quickly become devoid of eggs. Conversely, in the absence of suitable oviposition sites, females may die before laying all of their eggs. In pollinating fig wasps (Hymenoptera: Agaonidae), each species has an obligate mutualism with its host fig tree species [Ficus spp. (Moraceae)]. These pro-ovigenic wasps oviposit in individual ovaries within the inflorescences of monoecious Ficus (syconia, or ‘figs’), which contain many flowers. Each female flower can thus become a seed or be converted into a wasp gall. The mystery is that the wasps never oviposit in all fig ovaries, even when a fig contains enough wasp females with enough eggs to do so. The failure of all wasps to translate all of their eggs into offspring clearly contributes to mutualism persistence, but the underlying causal mechanisms are unclear. We found in an undescribed Brazilian Pegoscapus wasp population that the lifetime reproductive success of lone foundresses was relatively unaffected by constraints on oviposition. The number of offspring produced by lone foundresses experimentally introduced into receptive figs was generally lower than the numbers of eggs carried, despite the fact that the wasps were able to lay all or most of their eggs. Because we excluded any effects of intraspecific competitors and parasitic non-pollinating wasps, our data suggest that some pollinators produce few offspring because some of their eggs or larvae are unviable or are victims of plant defences.
Resumo:
Sustainable agricultural landscapes by definition provide high magnitude and stability of ecosystem services, biodiversity and crop productivity. However, few studies have considered landscape effects on the stability of ecosystem services. We tested whether isolation from florally diverse natural and semi-natural areas reduces the spatial and temporal stability of flower-visitor richness and pollination services in crop fields. We synthesised data from 29 studies with contrasting biomes, crop species and pollinator communities. Stability of flower-visitor richness, visitation rate (all insects except honey bees) and fruit set all decreased with distance from natural areas. At 1 km from adjacent natural areas, spatial stability decreased by 25, 16 and 9% for richness, visitation and fruit set, respectively, while temporal stability decreased by 39% for richness and 13% for visitation. Mean richness, visitation and fruit set also decreased with isolation, by 34, 27 and 16% at 1 km respectively. In contrast, honey bee visitation did not change with isolation and represented > 25% of crop visits in 21 studies. Therefore, wild pollinators are relevant for crop productivity and stability even when honey bees are abundant. Policies to preserve and restore natural areas in agricultural landscapes should enhance levels and reliability of pollination services.
Resumo:
Arthropods that have a direct impact on crop production (i.e. pests, natural enemies and pollinators) can be influenced by both local farm management and the context within which the fields occur in the wider landscape. However, the contributions and spatial scales at which these drivers operate and interact are not fully understood, particularly in the developing world. The impact of both local management and landscape context on insect pollinators and natural enemy communities and on their capacity to deliver related ecosystem services to an economically important tropical crop, pigeonpea was investigated. The study was conducted in nine paired farms across a gradient of increasing distance to semi-native vegetation in Kibwezi, Kenya. Results show that proximity of fields to semi-native habitats negatively affected pollinator and chewing insect abundance. Within fields, pesticide use was a key negative predictor of pollinator, pest and foliar active predator abundance. On the contrary, fertilizer application significantly enhanced pollinator and both chewing and sucking insect pest abundance. At a 1 km spatial scale of fields, there were significant negative effects of the number of semi-native habitat patches within fields dominated by mass flowering pigeonpea on pollinators abundance. For service provision, a significant decline in fruit set when insects were excluded from flowers was recorded. This study reveals the interconnections of pollinators, predators and pests with pigeonpea crop. For sustainable yields and to conserve high densities of both pollinators and predators of pests within pigeonpea landscapes, it is crucial to target the adoption of less disruptive farm management practices such as reducing pesticide and fertilizer inputs.
Resumo:
1 Pesticides are considered a threat to pollinators but little is known about the potential impacts of their widespread use on pollinators. Less still is known about the impacts on pollination, comprising the ecosystem service that pollinators provide to wildflowers and crops. 2 The present study measured flower visitation and pollination in an agricultural landscape, by placing potted flowering plants (Petunia sp.) in vine fields sprayed with a highly toxic insecticide (fenitrothion). During two sampling rounds, insect visitors to the petunias were observed and measures of pollination were recorded by counting and weighing seeds. 3 In the earlier sampling round, a lower species richness of insect visitors was observed in fields that had received an early application of insecticide. No negative impacts were found from later applications. The results obtained suggest a greater potential harm to insect pollinators and flower visitation as a result of insecticide application early in the season. 4 No reduction in pollination was found in fields that received an early insecticide application. Pollination was greater with two insecticide applications between sampling rounds rather than one application. 5 In the present study system, insecticide application had a negative effect on pollinators but a possible positive effect on pollination services. In some cases, it may be that actions for conserving biodiversity will not benefit pollination services to all plants.
Resumo:
There is concern that insect pollinators, such as honey bees, are currently declining in abundance, and are under serious threat from environmental changes such as habitat loss and climate change; the use of pesticides in intensive agriculture, and emerging diseases. This paper aims to evaluate how much public support there would be in preventing further decline to maintain the current number of bee colonies in the UK. The contingent valuation method (CVM) was used to obtain the willingness to pay (WTP) for a theoretical pollinator protection policy. Respondents were asked whether they would be WTP to support such a policy and how much would they pay? Results show that the mean WTP to support the bee protection policy was £1.37/week/household. Based on there being 24.9 million households in the UK, this is equivalent to £1.77 billion per year. This total value can show the importance of maintaining the overall pollination service to policy makers. We compare this total with estimates obtained using a simple market valuation of pollination for the UK.
Resumo:
1. Wild bees are one of the most important groups of pollinators in the temperate zone. Therefore, population declines have potentially negative impacts for both crop and wildflower pollination. Although heavy metal pollution is recognized to be a problem affecting large parts of the European Union, we currently lack insights into the effects of heavy metals on wild bees. 2. We investigated whether heavy metal pollution is a potential threat to wild bee communities by comparing (i) species number, (ii) diversity and (iii) abundance as well as (iv) natural mortality of emerging bees along two independent gradients of heavy metal pollution, one at Olkusz (OLK), Poland and the other at Avonmouth (AVO), UK. We used standardized nesting traps to measure species richness and abundance of wild bees, and we recorded the heavy metal concentration in pollen collected by the red mason bee Osmia rufa as a measure of pollution. 3. The concentration of cadmium, lead and zinc in pollen collected by bees ranged from a background level in unpolluted sites [OLK: 1·3, 43·4, 99·8 (mg kg−1); AVO: 0·8, 42·0, 56·0 (mg kg−1), respectively] to a high level on sites in the vicinity of the OLK and AVO smelters [OLK: 6·7, 277·0, 440·1 (mg kg−1); AVO: 9·3, 356·2, 592·4 (mg kg−1), respectively]. 4. We found that with increasing heavy metal concentration, there was a steady decrease in the number, diversity and abundance of solitary, wild bees. In the most polluted sites, traps were empty or contained single occupants, whereas in unpolluted sites, the nesting traps collected from 4 to 5 species represented by up to ten individuals. Moreover, the proportion of dead individuals of the solitary bee Megachile ligniseca increased along the heavy metal pollution gradient at OLK from 0·2 in uncontaminated sites to 0·5 in sites with a high concentration of pollution. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings highlight the negative relationship between heavy metal pollution and populations of wild bees and suggest that increasing wild bee richness in highly contaminated areas will require special conservation strategies. These may include creating suitable nesting sites and sowing a mixture of flowering plants as well as installing artificial nests with wild bee cocoons in polluted areas. Applying protection plans to wild pollinating bee communities in heavy metal-contaminated areas will contribute to integrated land rehabilitation to minimize the impact of pollution on the environment.
Resumo:
To inspire new ideas in research on pollination ecology, we list the most important unanswered questions in the field. This list was drawn up by contacting 170 scientists from different areas of pollination ecology and asking them to contribute their opinion on the greatest knowledge gaps that need to be addressed. Almost 40% of them took part in our email poll and we received more than 650 questions and comments, which we classified into different categories representing various aspects of pollination research. The original questions were merged and synthesised, and a final vote and ranking led to the resultant list. The categories cover plant sexual reproduction, pollen and stigma biology, abiotic pollination, evolution of animal-mediated pollination, interactions of pollinators and floral antagonists, pollinator behaviour, taxonomy, plant-pollinator assemblages, geographical trends in diversity, drivers of pollinator loss, ecosystem services, management of pollination, and conservation issues such as the implementation of pollinator conservation. We focused on questions that were of a broad scope rather than case-specific; thus, addressing some questions may not be feasible within single research projects but constitute a general guide for future directions. With this compilation we hope to raise awareness of pollination-related topics not only among researchers but also among non-specialists including policy makers, funding agencies and the public at large.
Resumo:
It is thought that speciation in phytophagous insects is often due to colonization of novel host plants, because radiations of plant and insect lineages are typically asynchronous. Recent phylogenetic comparisons have supported this model of diversification for both insect herbivores and specialized pollinators. An exceptional case where contemporaneous plant insect diversification might be expected is the obligate mutualism between fig trees (Ficus species, Moraceae) and their pollinating wasps (Agaonidae, Hymenoptera). The ubiquity and ecological significance of this mutualism in tropical and subtropical ecosystems has long intrigued biologists, but the systematic challenge posed by >750 interacting species pairs has hindered progress toward understanding its evolutionary history. In particular, taxon sampling and analytical tools have been insufficient for large-scale co-phylogenetic analyses. Here, we sampled nearly 200 interacting pairs of fig and wasp species from across the globe. Two supermatrices were assembled: on average, wasps had sequences from 77% of six genes (5.6kb), figs had sequences from 60% of five genes (5.5 kb), and overall 850 new DNA sequences were generated for this study. We also developed a new analytical tool, Jane 2, for event-based phylogenetic reconciliation analysis of very large data sets. Separate Bayesian phylogenetic analyses for figs and fig wasps under relaxed molecular clock assumptions indicate Cretaceous diversification of crown groups and contemporaneous divergence for nearly half of all fig and pollinator lineages. Event-based co-phylogenetic analyses further support the co-diversification hypothesis. Biogeographic analyses indicate that the presentday distribution of fig and pollinator lineages is consistent with an Eurasian origin and subsequent dispersal, rather than with Gondwanan vicariance. Overall, our findings indicate that the fig-pollinator mutualism represents an extreme case among plant-insect interactions of coordinated dispersal and long-term co-diversification.