Pollination system and the effect of inflorescence size on fruit set in the deceptive orchid Cephalanthera falcata
- 498 Downloads
Larger inflorescences in reward-producing plants can benefit plants by increasing both pollinator attraction and the duration of visits by individual pollinators. However, ultimately, inflorescence size is determined by the balance between the benefits of large inflorescences and the increased cost of geitonogamy. At present, little is known about the relationship between inflorescence size and fecundity in deceptive plants. Given that pollinators are likely to leave inflorescences lacking rewards quickly, it seems unlikely that longer pollinator visits and the risk of geitonogamy would be strong selective pressures in these species, which indicates that pollinator attraction might be the most important factor influencing their inflorescence size. Here we examined the pollination ecology of the deceptive orchid Cephalanthera falcata in order to clarify the effects of inflorescence size on the fruit set of this non-rewarding species. Field observations of the floral visitors showed that C. falcata is pollinated by the andrenid bee Andrena aburana, whilst pollination experiments demonstrated that this orchid species is neither autogamous nor apogamous, but is strongly pollinator dependent. Three consecutive years of field observations revealed that fruit set was positively correlated with the number of flowers per inflorescence. These results provide strong evidence that the nectarless orchid C. falcata benefits from producing larger inflorescences that attract a greater number of innate pollinators. Large inflorescences may have a greater positive effect on fruit set in deceptive plants because a growing number of studies suggest that fruit set in reward-producing plants is usually unaffected by display size.
KeywordsDisplay size Pollinator limitation Orchidaceae Reproductive success
This work was funded by a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science grant (22247003) to MK, and a JSPS Research Fellowship for Young Scientists (12J00602) to KS.
- Arditti J (1992) Fundamentals of orchid biology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Environment Agency of Japan (2000) Threatened wildlife of Japan, Red Data Book. (Vascular plants). Japan Wildlife Research Center, TokyoGoogle Scholar
- Harrap A, Harrap S (2005) Orchids of Britain and Ireland. A & C Black, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Kitamura S, Murata G, Koyama T (1964) Colored illustrations of herbaceous plants of Japan (Monocotyledoneae), vol III. Hoikusha, OsakaGoogle Scholar
- Nilsson LA (1979) Anthecological studies on the lady’s slipper, Cypripedium calceolus (Orchidaceae). Bot Notiser 132:329–347Google Scholar
- Pellegrino G, Bellusci F, Musacchio A (2010) The effects of inflorescence size and flower position on female reproductive success in three deceptive orchids. Bot Stud 51:351–356Google Scholar
- Renner SS (2006) Rewardless flowers in the angiosperms and the role of insect cognition in their evolution. In: Waser NM, Olerton J (eds) Plant–pollinator interactions: from specialization to generalization. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 123–144Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team (2011) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/
- Roberts DL (2003) Pollination biology: the role of sexual reproduction in orchid conservation. In: Dixon KW, Kell SP, Barrett RL, Cribb PJ (eds) orchid conservation. Natural History Publications, Kota Kinabalu, pp 113–136Google Scholar
- Tanaka H (1965) Pollination of three species belonging to Cephalanthera. J Jap Bot 40:187–189Google Scholar
- Walsh RP, Arnold PM, Michaels HJ (2014) Effects of pollination limitation and seed predation on female reproductive success of a deceptive orchid. AoB plants 6: plu031Google Scholar