, Volume 150, Issue 2, pp 225–232 | Cite as

Selection on floral display in insect-pollinated Primula farinosa: effects of vegetation height and litter accumulation

  • Jon ÅgrenEmail author
  • Claire Fortunel
  • Johan Ehrlén
Plant Animal Interactions


Grazing reduces litter thickness and vegetation height and may thereby indirectly affect reproductive success and selection on floral characters in plants with prostrate growth. Reductions in litter thickness and vegetation height should influence both the resource status of plants with leaves positioned close to the ground and the significance of inflorescence height for interactions with pollinators and seed predators. We experimentally examined how simulated grazing of surrounding vegetation affected pollen limitation, fruit predation and fecundity of short-scaped and long-scaped Primula farinosa, which differ markedly in floral display and therefore in expected attractiveness to pollinators. Litter removal and pruning of surrounding vegetation increased fruit and seed production per plant in the year of the treatment and the probability of flowering in the following year. Pollen limitation of fruit and seed production was stronger in the short-scaped morph than in the long-scaped morph, but was not significantly affected by litter removal and simulated grazing of surrounding vegetation. Supplemental hand-pollination reduced seed size in the year of the treatment and flowering probability in the second year, and these effects did not differ among scape morphs or grazing treatments. The results suggest that grazing indirectly favours seed production in P. farinosa, mainly because it increases the resource status of plants that escape damage. Contrary to expectation, there was no strong evidence that litter accumulation and tall vegetation increase the severity of pollen limitation or reduce the relative performance of the short-scaped morph.


Biotic interactions Herbivory Pollination Primula farinosa Seed production 



This study was financially supported by a grant from the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning to JE and JÅ.


  1. Ashman T-L, Morgan MT (2004) Explaining phenotypic selection on plant attractive characters: male function, gender balance or ecological context? Proc Roy Soc Lond B 271:553–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Campbell DR (1996) Evolution of floral traits in a hermaphroditic plant: field measurements of heritabilities and genetic correlations. Evolution 50:1442–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cariveau D, Irwin RE, Brody AK, Sevillano Garcia-Mayeya L, von der Ohe A (2004) Direct and indirect effects of pollinators and seed predators to selection on plant and floral traits. Oikos 104:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Collin CL, Pennings PS, Rueffler C, Widmer A, Shykoff JA (2002) Natural enemies and sex: how seed predators and pathogens contribute to sex-differential reproductive success in a gynodioecious plant. Oecologia 131:94–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diaz S, Noy-Meir I, Cabido M (2001) Can grazing response of herbaceous plants be predicted from simple vegetative traits? J Appl Ecol 38:497–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Donelly S, Lortie JL, Aarssen LW (1998) Pollination in Verbascum thapsus (Scrophulariaceae): the advantage of being tall. Am J Bot 85:1618–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ehrlén J (1992) Proximate limits to seed production in a herbaceous perennial legume, Lathyrus vernus. Ecology 73:1820–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ehrlén J (1997) Risk of grazing and flower number in a perennial plant. Oikos 80:428–434Google Scholar
  9. Ehrlén J, Eriksson O (1995) Pollen limitation and population growth in a herbaceous perennial legume. Ecology 76:652–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehrlén J, Käck S, Ågren J (2002) Pollen limitation, seed predation and scape length in Primula farinosa. Oikos 97:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ekstam U, Jacobson R, Mattson M, Porsne T (1984) Ölands och Gotlands växtvärld. Natur och Kultur, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  12. Galen C (1989) Measuring pollinator-mediated selection on morphological traits: bumblesbees and the alpine sky pilot, Polemonium viscosum. Evolution 43:882–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Galen C, Cuba J (2001) Down the tube: pollinators, predators, and the evolution of flower shape in the alpine skypilot, Polemonium viscosum. Evolution 55:1963–1971PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Giles BE, Pettersson TM, Carlsson-Granér U, Ingvarsson PK (2006) Natural selection on floral traits of female Silene dioica by a sexually transmitted disease. New Phytol 169:729–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gómez JM (2003) Herbivory reduces the strength of pollinator-mediated selection in the Mediterranean herb Erysimum mediohispanicum: consequences for plant specialization. Am Nat 162:242–256PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hainsworth FR, Wolf LL, Mercier T (1984) Pollination and pre-dispersal seed predation: net effects on reproduction and inflorescence characteristics in Ipomopsis aggregate. Oecologia 63:405–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hambler DJ, Dixon JM (2003) Primula farinosa L. J Ecol 91:694–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Herrera CM (2000) Measuring the effects of pollinators and herbivores: evidence for non-additivity in a perennial herb. Ecology 81:2170–2176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lavorel S, McIntyre S, Landsberg J, Forbes TDA (1997) Plant functional classifications: from general groups to specific groups based on response to disturbance. Trends Ecol Evol 12:474–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leimu R, Syrjänen K, Ehrlén J, Lehtilä K (2002) Pre-dispersal seed predation in Primula veris: among-population variation in damage intensity and selection on flower number. Oecologia 133:510–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindborg R, Ehrlén J (2002) Evaluating the extinction risk of a perennial herb: demographic data versus historical records. Cons Biol 16:683–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Louault F, Pillar VD, Aufrère J, Garnier E, Soussana J-F (2005) Plant traits and functional types in response to reduced disturbance in a semi-natural grassland. J Veg Sci 16:151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Matsumoto J, Muraoka H, Washitani I (2000) Whole plant carbon gain of an endangered herbaceous species Aster kantoensis and the influence of shading by an alien grass Eragrostis curvula in its gravelly floodplain habitat. Ann Bot 86:787–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Montalvo AM, Ackerman JD (1987) Limitations to fruit production in Ionopsis utricularoides (Orchidaceae). Biotropica 19:24–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Obeso JR (2002) The costs of reproduction in plants. New Phytol 155:321–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Connell LM, Johnston MO (1998) Male and female pollination success in a deceptive orchid, a selection study. Ecology 79:1246–1260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peakall R, Handel SN (1993) Pollinators discriminate among floral heights of a sexually deceptive orchid: implications for selection. Evolution 47:1681–1687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Primack RB, Hall P (1990) Costs of reproduction in the pink lady’s slipper orchid: a four year experimental study. Am Nat 136:638–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. SAS (2002) SAS version 9.1 for Windows. SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Schemske DW, Ågren J (1995) Deceit pollination and selection on female flower size in Begonia involucrata: an experimental approach. Evolution 49:207–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shykoff JA, Bucheli E, Kaltz O (1997) Anther smut disease in Dianthus silvestris (Caryophyllaceae): natural selection on floral traits. Evolution 51:383–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sterner R (1986) Ölands kärlväxtflora, 2nd edn. Forskningsrådens förlagstjänst, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  33. Toräng P, Ehrlén J, Ågren J (2006) Facilitation in an insect-pollinated herb with a floral display dimorphism. Ecology 87:2113–2117PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Totland Ø (2001) Environment-dependent pollen limitation and selection on floral traits in an alpine species. Ecology 82:2233–2244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Traveset A (1995) Spatio-temporal variation in predispersal reproductive losses of a Mediterranean shrub, Euphorbia dendroides L. Oecologia 103:118–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Valentine DH (eds) (1972) Flora Europaea, vol 3. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Vanhoenacker D, Ågren J, Ehrlén J (2006) Spatio-temporal variation in pollen limitation and reproductive success of two scape morphs in Primula farinosa. New Phytol 169:615–621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Noordwijk AJV, de Jong G (1986) Acquisition and allocation of resources: their influence on variation in life history tactics. Am Nat 128:137–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vaughton G, Ramsey M (1998) Floral display, pollinator visitation and reproductive success in the dioecious perennial herb, Wurmbea dioica (Liliaceae). Oecologia 115:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Ecology/Department of Ecology and Evolution, Evolutionary Biology CentreUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of BotanyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden
  3. 3.Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, CNRS-UMR 5175Montpellier cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations