Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 55, Issue 2, pp 251–257 | Cite as

A comparison of distances flown by different visitors to flowers of the same species

  • Nickolas M. Waser
Original Papers

Summary

The morphologically complex flowers of Delphinium nelsonii, D. barbeyi, and Ipomopsis aggregata are visited by a wide variety of animals. Visitors to each species range from small insects, such as worker bumblebees and solitary bees, to hummingbirds, and thus span roughly an order of magnitude in body mass and metabolic rate while flying; they also differ in type of food collected and in their efficacy as pollinators. Despite these differences, all the visitors to a given plant species fly similar, short distances between successively visited flowers and plants. There are no significant relationships between mean flight distance and metabolic rate or body mass among the visitors to any plant species. Thus there is no evidence that flight characteristics depend on anything as straightforward as whether flower visitors have high or low energetic requirements.

Keywords

Plant Species Significant Relationship Short Distance Metabolic Rate Complex Flower 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker HG, Hurd PD, Jr (1968) Intrafloral ecology. Ann Rev Entomol 13:385–414Google Scholar
  2. Brown JH, Calder WA, Kodric-Brown A (1978) Correlates and consequences of body size in nectar-feeding birds. Am Zool 18:687–700Google Scholar
  3. Faegri K, Pijl L van der (1971) The principles of pollination ecology. Second edition. Pergamon-Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Heinrich B, Raven PH (1972) Energetics and pollination ecology. Science 176:597–602Google Scholar
  5. Heinrich B (1975) Energetics of pollination. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 6:139–170Google Scholar
  6. Inouye DW (1976) Resource partitioning and community structure: A study of bumblebees in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Doctoral dissertation, Univ of North Carolina, Chapel HillGoogle Scholar
  7. Janzen DH (1971) Euglossine bees as long-distance pollinators of tropical trees. Science 171:203–205Google Scholar
  8. Krebs JR (1978) Optimal foraging: Decision rules for predators. In: Krebs JR and Davies NB (eds) Behavioral ecology, an evolutionary approach, Sinauer, Sunderland, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  9. Lertzman KP, Gass CL (1982) Alternative models of pollen transfer. In: Jones CE and Little RJ (eds) Handbook of experimental pollination ecology, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, in pressGoogle Scholar
  10. Levin DA, Kerster HW, Niedzlek M (1971) Pollinator flight directionality and its effect on pollen flow. Evolution 25:113–118Google Scholar
  11. Levin DA, Kerster HW (1974) Gene flow in seed plants. Evol Biol 7:139–220Google Scholar
  12. Levin DA (1979) The nature of plant species. Science 204:381–384Google Scholar
  13. Pijl L van der (1960) Ecological aspects of flower evolution. I. Zoophilous flower classes. Evolution 15:44–59Google Scholar
  14. Price MV, Waser NM (1979) Pollen dispersal and optimal outcrossing in Delphinium nelsonii. Nature 277:294–296Google Scholar
  15. Pyke GH, Pulliam HR, Charnov EL (1977) Optimal foraging: A selective review of theory and tests. Q Rev Biol 52:137–154Google Scholar
  16. Pyke GH (1978) Optimal foraging: Movement patterns of bumblebees between inflorescences. Theor Popul Biol 13:72–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Pyke GH (1979) Optimal foraging in bumblebees: Rule of movement between flowers within inflorescences. Anim Behav 27:1167–1181Google Scholar
  18. Pyke GH (1980) Optimal foraging in nectar-feeding animals and coevolution with their plants. In: Kamil AC and Sargent TD (eds) Foraging behavior: Ecological, ethological, and psychological approaches, Garland, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Pyke GH (1981) optimal foraging in hummingbirds: Rule of movement between inflorescences. Anim Behav 29:889–896Google Scholar
  20. Schaal BA (1978) Density dependent foraging on Liatris pycnostachya. Evolution 32:452–454Google Scholar
  21. Schaal BA (1980) Measurement of gene flow in Lupinus texensis. Nature 284:450–451Google Scholar
  22. Schmitt J (1980) Pollinator foraging behavior and gene dispersal in Senecio (Compositae). Evolution 34:934–943Google Scholar
  23. Stiles FG (1978) Ecological and evolutionary implications of bird pollination. Am Zool 18:715–727Google Scholar
  24. Thomson JD, Plowright RC (1980) Pollen carryover, nectar rewards, and pollinator behavior with special reference to Diervilla lonicera. Oecologia (Berlin) 46:68–74Google Scholar
  25. Turner ME, Stephans JC, Anderson WW (1981) Homozygosity and patch structure in plant populations as a result of nearest neighbor pollination. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA, 70:203–207Google Scholar
  26. Waddington KD (1979) Flight patterns of three species of sweat bees (Halictidae) foraging at Convolvulus arvensis. J Kansas Ent Soc 52:751–758Google Scholar
  27. Waddington KD (1980) Flight patterns of foraging bees relative to density of artifical flowers and distribution of nectar. Oecologia (Berlin) 44:199–204Google Scholar
  28. Waddington KD (1981) Factors influencing pollen flow in bumblebee-pollinated Delphinium virescens. Oikos 37:153–159Google Scholar
  29. Waser NM (1978) Competition for hummingbird pollination and sequential flowering in two Colorado wildflowers. Ecology 59:934–944Google Scholar
  30. Waser NM, Real LA (1979) Effective mutualism between sequentially flowering plant species. Nature 281:670–672Google Scholar
  31. Waser NM, Price MV (1981) Pollinator choice and stabilizing selection for flower color in Delphinium nelsonii. Evolution 35:376–390Google Scholar
  32. Waser NM, Price MV (1982a) Optimal and actual outcrossing in plants, and the nature of plant-pollinator interaction. In: Jones CE and Little RJ (eds) Handbook of experimental pollination ecology, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, in pressGoogle Scholar
  33. Waser NM, Price MV (1982b) A comparison of pollen and fluorescent dye carryover by natural pollinators of Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae). Ecology 63:1168–1172Google Scholar
  34. Wright S (1969) Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol 2: The theory of gene frequencies. Univ Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nickolas M. Waser
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA
  2. 2.Rocky Mountain Biological LaboratoryCrested ButteUSA

Personalised recommendations