CHEMOECOLOGY

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 65–73

Evolutionary aspects of perfume collection in male euglossine bees (Hymenoptera) and of nest deception in bee-pollinated flowers

  • Klaus Lunau
Article

Summary

A fascinating pollination system has been evolved between perfume producing flowers and perfume collecting male euglossine bees in the neotropics. Detailed investigations have contributed to an understanding of the interactions between euglossine males and flowers as a pollination system. The role which the collected perfume plays in the reproductive behaviour of euglossine bees is not fully understood. A favoured hypothesis suggests that the collected fragrances are used as precursors for male sex pheromones and thus serve to attract conspecific males or females. It is not known how perfume collection behaviour evolved. Here, an evolutionary approach presents a new hypothesis which suggests that the evolution of perfume collection in euglossine males is based upon pre-existing signals which were attractive to females and males. It is further suggested that, at the evolutionary outset, flowers mimicked nest sites to deceive nest-seeking euglossine bees. In addition, a comparative study was undertaken on the phenomena of nest-mimicking flowers in related bee families.

Key words

euglossine flowers perfume collection euglossophily floral fragrant exudates nesting behaviour mating behaviour bee pheromones nest mimicry signal evolution Hymenoptera Apidae Euglossinae 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackerman JD (1983) Specificity and mutual dependency of the orchid-euglossine bee interaction. Biol J Linn Soc 20:301–314Google Scholar
  2. Ackerman JD (1989) Geographic and seasonal variation in fragrance choices and preferences of male euglossine bees. Biotropica 21:340–347Google Scholar
  3. Alcock J, Barrows EM, Gordh G, Hubbard LJ, Kirkendall L, Pyle DW, Ponder TL, Zalom FG (1978) The ecology and evolution of male reproductive behaviour in the bees and wasps. Zool J Linn Soc 64:293–326Google Scholar
  4. Armbruster WS (1992) Phylogeny and the evolution of plant-animal interactions. BioScience 42:12–20Google Scholar
  5. Armbruster WS, Webster G (1979) Pollination of two species ofDalechampia (Euphorbiaceae) in Mexico by euglossine bees. Biotropica 11:278–283Google Scholar
  6. Beaman RS, Decker PJ, Beaman JH (1988) Pollination ofRafflesia (Rafflesiaceae). Amer J Bot 75:1148–1162Google Scholar
  7. Bergström G (1978) Role of volatile chemicals inOphrys-pollinator interactions. Pp 207–230in Harbone JB (ed.) Biochemical Aspects of Plant and Animal Coevolution. London: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergström G, Tengö J (1974) Farnesyl- and geranyl-esters as main volatile constituents of the secretion from Dufour's gland in 6 species ofAndrena. Chem Scr 5:28–38Google Scholar
  9. Blum MS, Brand JM (1972) Social insect pheromones: their chemistry and function. Am Zool 12:553–576Google Scholar
  10. Butler CG (1965) Sex attraction inAndrena flavipes (Hymenoptera: Apidae), with some observations on nest-site restriction. Proc R Entomol Soc London A 40:77–80Google Scholar
  11. Cane JH (1981) Dufour's gland secretion in the cell linings of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). J Chem Ecol 7:403–410Google Scholar
  12. Cane JH (1983) Olfactory evaluation ofAndrena host nest suitability by kleptoparasiticNomada bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea). Anim Behav 31:138–144Google Scholar
  13. Cane JH, Eickwort GC, Wesley FR, Spielholz J (1983) Foraging, grooming and mate-seeking behaviors ofMacropis nuda (Hymenoptera, Melittidae) and use ofLysimachia ciliata (Primulaceae) oils in larval provisions and cell linings. Amer Midl Nat 110:257–264Google Scholar
  14. Crüger H (1865) A few notes of the fecundation of orchids and their morphology. J Linn Soc London Bot VIII:129–135Google Scholar
  15. Cruz-Landim C da (1963) Evolution of the wax and scent glands in the Apinae (Hymenoptera, Apidae). J New York Entomol Soc 71:2–31Google Scholar
  16. Dobat K, Peikert-Holle T (1985) Blüten und Fledermäuse. Frankfurt a.M.: KramerGoogle Scholar
  17. Dodson CH, Dressler RL, Hills HG, Adams RM, Williams NH (1969) Biologically active compounds in orchid fragrances. Science 164:1243–1249Google Scholar
  18. Dodson CH, Frymire GP (1961) Natural pollination of orchids. Mo Bot Gard Bull 49:133–152Google Scholar
  19. Dressler RL (1968) Pollination by euglossine bees. Evolution 22:202–210Google Scholar
  20. Dressler RL (1982) Biology of the orchid bees (Euglossini). Annu Rev Ecol Syst 13:373–394Google Scholar
  21. Ducke A (1901) Beobachtungen über Blütenbesuch, Erscheinungszeit, usw. der bei Pará vorkommenden Bienen. Z syst Hymenopterologie u Dipterologie 1:25–67Google Scholar
  22. Duffield RM, Wheeler JW, Eickwort GC (1984) Sociochemicals of bees. Pp 387–428in Bell WJ, Cardé RT (eds) Chemical Ecology of Insects. London: Chapman and HallGoogle Scholar
  23. Faegri K, van der Pijl L (1979) The Principles of Pollination Ecology. Oxford: Pergamon PressGoogle Scholar
  24. Francke W, Schröder W, Bergström G, Tengö J (1984) Esters in the volatile secretions of bees. Pp 127–136in The Ecological Station of Uppsala University on Öland 1963–1983. UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  25. Gerlach G, Schill R (1991) Composition of orchid scents attracting euglossine bees. Bot Acta 104:379–391Google Scholar
  26. Gildemeister E, Hoffmann F (1956–1968) Die ätherischen Öle. 4th ed. Berlin: Akademie VerlagGoogle Scholar
  27. Gottsberger G (1974) The structure and function of the primitive angiosperm flower — a discussion. Acta Bot Neerl 23:461–471Google Scholar
  28. Happ GM, Meinwald J (1966) Biosynthesis of monoterpenes in an ant (Acanthomyops claviger). Adv in Chemistry, ser 53:27–33Google Scholar
  29. Hefetz A (1987) The role of Dufour's gland secretion in bees. Physiol Entomol 12:243–253Google Scholar
  30. Hills HG, Williams NH, Dodson CH (1972) Floral fragrances as isolating mechanisms in the genusCatasetum (Orchidaceae). Biotropica 4:61–76Google Scholar
  31. Hoehne FC (1932) Contribuícào para o conecimento d. génereCatasetum RICH. Bolet de Agricultura, Sao Paulo 33a:143–196Google Scholar
  32. Kerr WE, Sakagami SF, Zucchi R, De Portugal Araujo V, De Camargo JMF (1967) Observacoes sobre la architetura dos ninhos es compartamento de algumas especies de abelhas amazonas (Hymenoptera, Apoidea). Atlas do Simposio sobre a Biota Amazonica 5 (Zoologia):25–309Google Scholar
  33. Kimsey LS (1980) The behaviour of male orchid bees (Apidae, Hymenoptera, Insecta) and the question of leks. Anim Behav 28:996–1004Google Scholar
  34. Kimsey LS (1982) Systematics of bees of the genusEufriesea. Univ Calif Pub Entomol 95:1–123Google Scholar
  35. Kugler H (1956) Über die optische Wirkung von Fliegenblumen auf Fliegen. Ber Dtsch Bot Ges 69:387–398Google Scholar
  36. Kullenberg B (1953) Some observations on scents among bees and wasps. Entomol Ts 74:1–7Google Scholar
  37. Kullenberg B (1961) Studies inOphrys pollination. Zoologiska Bidrag fran Uppsala 34:1–340Google Scholar
  38. Levinson HZ (1972) Zur Evolution und Biosynthese der terpenoiden Pheromone and Hormone. Naturwissenschaften 59:477–484Google Scholar
  39. Lunau K (1988) Innate and learned behaviour of flower-visiting hoverflies — flower-dummy experiments withEristalis pertinax (Scopoli) (Diptera, Syrphidae). Zool JB Physiol 92:487–499Google Scholar
  40. Lunau K (1990) Colour saturation triggers innate reactions to flower signals: Flower dummy experiments with bumblebees. J Comp Physiol A 166:827–834Google Scholar
  41. Lunau K (1991) Innate flower recognition in bumblebees (Bombus terrestris, B. lucorum: Apidae): optical signals from stamens as landing reaction releasers. Ethology 88:203–214Google Scholar
  42. Neff JL, Simpson BB (1981) Oil-collecting structures in the Anthophoridae (Hymenoptera): morphology, function, and use in systematics. J Kansas Entomol Soc 54:95–123Google Scholar
  43. Nilsson A (1979) Anthecological studies on the Lady's Slipper,Cypripedium calceolus (Orchidaceae). Bot Notiser 132:329–347Google Scholar
  44. Nilsson A (1981) The pollination ecology ofListera ovata (Orchidaceae). Nord J Bot 1:461–480Google Scholar
  45. Nilsson A (1983) Anthecology ofOrchis mascula (Orchidaceae). Nord J Bot 3:17–179Google Scholar
  46. Osche G (1983) Optische Signale in der Coevolution von Pflanze und Tier. Ber Dtsch Bot Ges 96:1–27Google Scholar
  47. Paulus HF, Gack C (1980) Beobachtungen und Untersuchungen zur Bestäubungsbiologie südspanischerOphrys-Arten. Die Orchidee, Sonderheft, 55–68, Nov 1980Google Scholar
  48. Paulus HF, Gack C (in prep.) Imitation of a sleeping-hole inOphrys helenae?Google Scholar
  49. Pellmyr O, Groth I, Bergström G (1984) Comparative analysis of the floral odors ofActaea spicata andA. erythrocarpa (Ranunculaceae). Nova Acta Reg Soc Scient Upsaliensis, Serie V: C, 3:157–160Google Scholar
  50. Pellmyr O, Thien LB (1986) Insect reproduction and floral fragrance: keys to the evolution of the angiosperms? Taxon 35:76–85Google Scholar
  51. Plant JD, Paulus HF (1987) Comparative morphology of the postmentum of bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) with special remarks on the evolution of the lorum. Z zool Syst Evolut-forsch 25:81–103Google Scholar
  52. Porsch O (1955) Zur Biologie derCatasetum-Blüte. Österr Bot Zeitschr 102:117–157Google Scholar
  53. Schemske DW, Lande R (1984) Fragrance collection and territorial display by male orchid bees. Anim Behav 32:935–937Google Scholar
  54. Schremmer F (1982) Blühverhalten und Bestäubungsbiologie vonCardulovica palmata (Cyclanthaceae) — ein ökologisches Paradoxon. Pl Syst Evol 140:95–107Google Scholar
  55. Shearer DA, Boch R (1966) Citral in the Nassanoff pheromone of the honeybee. J Insect Physiol 12:1513–1521Google Scholar
  56. Stowe MK (1988) Chemical mimicry. Pp 513–580in Spencer KC (ed.) Chemical Mediation of Coevolution. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  57. Tengö J (1979) Chemical signals and odour-released behaviour inAndrena bees (Hymenoptera, Andrenidae). Uppsala: Doctoral thesisGoogle Scholar
  58. Tengö J, Bergström G (1977) Cleptoparasitism and odor mimetism in bees: doNomada males imitate the odor ofAndrena females? Science 196:1117–1119Google Scholar
  59. Tengö J, Bergström G (1978) Identical isoprenoid esters in the Dufour's gland secretions of North American and EuropeanAndrena bees (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). J Kansas Entomol Soc 51:521–526Google Scholar
  60. Thien LB, Heimermann WH, Holman RT (1975) Floral odors and quantitative taxonomy ofMagnolia andLiriodendron. Taxon 24:557–568Google Scholar
  61. van der Pijl L (1936) Fledermäuse und Blumen. Flora 31: 1–40Google Scholar
  62. Vogel S (1962) Duftdrüsen im Dienste der Bestäubung. Abh Akad Wiss u Lit, math-nat Kl (Mainz), Heft 10, Jg 1962:599–763Google Scholar
  63. Vogel S (1963) Das sexuelle Anlockungsprinzip der Catasetinen- und Stanhopeen-Blüten und die wahre Funktion ihres sogenannten Futtergewebes. Österr Bot Zeitschr 110:308–337Google Scholar
  64. Vogel S (1966) Parfümsammelnde Bienen als Bestäuber von Orchidaceen undGloxinia. Österr Bot Zeitschr 113:302–361Google Scholar
  65. Vogel S (1972) Pollination vonOrchis papilionacea L. in den Schwarmbahnen vonEucera tuberculata F. Jahresber Naturwis Ver Wuppertal 25:67–74Google Scholar
  66. Vogel S (1974) Ölblumen und ölsammelnde Bienen. Akad Wiss Lit, mathnat Kl, Tropische und subtropische Pflanzenwelt 7:1–267Google Scholar
  67. Vogel S (1978) Pilzmückenblumen als Pilzmimeten. I und II. Flora (Jena) 167:329–366, 367–398Google Scholar
  68. Vogel S (1986) Ölblumen und ölsammelnde Bienen. Zweite Folge.Lysimachia undMacropis. Akad Wiss Lit, math-nat Kl, Tropische und subtropische Pflanzenwelt 54:1–168Google Scholar
  69. Vogel S (1989) Fettes Öl als Lockmittel. Akad Wiss Lit (Mainz), Jubiläumsband:113–130Google Scholar
  70. Wickler W (1965) Mimicry and the evolution of animal communication. Nature 208:519–521Google Scholar
  71. Williams NH, Whitten WM (1983) Orchid floral fragrances and male euglossine bees: methods and advances in the last sesquidecade. Biol Bull 164:355–395Google Scholar
  72. Zucchi R, Sakagami SF, De Camargo JMF (1969) Biological observations on a neotropical parasocial bee,Eulaema nigrita, with a review on the biology of Euglossinae (Hymenoptera, Apidae). A comparative study. J Fac Sci Hokkaido Univ Ser VI, Zool 17:271–379Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus Lunau
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Zoologie der UniversitätRegensburgFederal Republic of Germany

Personalised recommendations