Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 43, Issue 5, pp 469–479 | Cite as

Sexual Deception in the Eucera-Pollinated Ophrys leochroma: A Chemical Intermediate between Wasp- and Andrena-Pollinated Species

  • Monica CuervoEmail author
  • Demetra Rakosy
  • Carlos Martel
  • Stefan Schulz
  • Manfred Ayasse


Ophrys flowers mimic sex pheromones of attractive females of their pollinators and attract males, which attempt to copulate with the flower and thereby pollinate it. Virgin females and orchid flowers are known to use the same chemical compounds in order to attract males. The composition of the sex pheromone and its floral analogue, however, vary between pollinator genera. Wasp-pollinated Ophrys species attract their pollinators by using polar hydroxy acids, whereas Andrena-pollinated species use a mixture of non-polar hydrocarbons. The phylogeny of Ophrys shows that its evolution was marked by episodes of rapid diversification coinciding with shifts to different pollinator groups: from wasps to Eucera and consequently to Andrena and other bees. To gain further insights, we studied pollinator attraction in O. leochroma in the context of intra- and inter-generic pollinator shifts, radiation, and diversification in the genus Ophrys. Our model species, O. leochroma, is pollinated by Eucera kullenbergi males and lies in the phylogeny between the wasp and Andrena-pollinated species; therefore, it is a remarkable point to understand pollinator shifts. We collected surface extracts of attractive E. kullenbergi females and labellum extracts of O. leochroma and analyzed them by using gas chromatography with electroantennographic detection (GC-EAD) and gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS). We also performed field bioassays. Our results show that O. leochroma mimics the sex pheromone of its pollinator’s female by using aldehydes, alcohols, fatty acids, and non-polar compounds (hydrocarbons). Therefore, in terms of the chemistry of pollinator attraction, Eucera-pollinated Ophrys species might represent an intermediate stage between wasp- and Andrena-pollinated orchid species.


Sexually deceptive orchid Ophrys leochroma Long-horned bee Eucera kullenbergi Chemical mimicry Pollinator shift Medium polar and non-polar compounds 



We thank Hannes Paulus, Eva Weber, Annika Wess, and Manuel Stech-Domene for helping us collect plant and bee material and Omer Nevo and Hannah Burger for many helpful comments and discussions on an early version of the manuscript. We are further grateful for the constructive comments of associate editor Wittko Francke. This research was supported by Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (Colciencias) throught its Créditos Condonables para estudios de Doctorado en el Exterior-2011 (granted to MC).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10886_2017_848_MOESM1_ESM.docx (52 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 51.6 kb)


  1. Adams RP (2007) Identification of essential oil components by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, 4th edn. Allured Publishing Corporation, Carol Stream, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonopoulos Z (2009) The bee orchids of Greece. The genus Ophrys. Mediterraneo Editions, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayasse M (2006) Floral scent and pollinator attraction in sexually deceptive orchids. In: Pichersky E (ed) Dudareva N and. Biology of floral scent. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 219–241Google Scholar
  4. Ayasse M, Dötterl S (2014) The role of preadaptations or evolutionary novelties for the evolution of sexually deceptive orchids. New Phytol 203:710–712CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Ayasse M, Schiestl FP, Paulus HF, Löfstedt C, Hansson BS, Ibarra F, Francke W (2000) Evolution of reproductive strategies in the sexually deceptive orchid Ophrys sphegodes: how does flower-specific variation of odor signals influence reproductive success? Evolution 54:1995–2006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Ayasse M, Paxton RJ, Tengö J (2001) Mating behavior and chemical communication in the order hymenoptera. Annu Rev Entomol 46:31–78CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ayasse M, Schiestl FP, Paulus HF, Ibarra F, Francke W (2003) Pollinator attraction in a sexually deceptive orchid by means of unconventional chemicals. Proc Royal Soc Lond B Bio 270:517–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ayasse M, Stökl J, Francke W (2011) Chemical ecology and pollinator-driven speciation in sexually deceptive orchids. Phytochemistry 72:1667–1677CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Benitez-Vieyra S, Medina AM, Cocucci AA (2009) Variable selection patterns on the labellum shape of Geoblasta pennicillata, a sexually deceptive orchid. J Evol Biol 22:2354–2362CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Royal Stat Soc B 57:289–300Google Scholar
  11. Bohman B, Phillips RD, Menz MHM, Berntsson BW, Flematti GR, Barrow RA, Dixon KW, Peakall R (2014) Discovery of pyrazines as pollinator sex pheromones and orchid semiochemicals: implications for the evolution of sexual deception. New Phytol 203:939–952CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bohman B, Flematti GR, Barrow RA, Pichersky E, Peakall R (2016) Pollination by sexual deception-it takes chemistry to work. Curr Opin Plant Biol 32:37–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Borg-Karlson AK (1990) Chemical and ethological studies of pollination in the genus Ophrys (Orchidaceae). Phytochemistry 29:1359–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Breitkopf H, Onstein RE, Cafasso D, Schlüter PM, Cozzolino S (2014) Multiple shifts to different pollinators fuelled rapid diversification in sexually deceptive Ophrys orchids. New Phytol 207:377–389CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cardinal S, Danforth BN (2013) Bees diversified in the age of eucodicots. Proc R Soc Lond B 280:20122686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) Primer v6: user manual/tutorial. Plymouth: Primer-E, p 91Google Scholar
  17. Cozzolino S, Scopece G (2008) Specificity in pollination and consequences for postmating reproductive isolation in deceptive Mediterranean orchids. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 363:3037–3046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cozzolino S, Widmer A (2005) Orchid diversity: an evolutionary consequence of deception? Trends Ecol Evol 20:487–494CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dalziell AH, Welbergen JA (2016) Mimicry for all modalities. Ecol Lett 19:609–619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Delforge P (2006) Orchids of Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East. London: A&C Black Publishers LtdGoogle Scholar
  21. Devey DS, Bateman RM, Fay MF, Hawkins JA (2008) Friends or relatives? Phylogenetics and species delimitation in the controversial European orchid genus Ophrys. Ann Bot-London 10:385–402Google Scholar
  22. Ehrendorfer F (1980) Hybridisierung, Polyploidie und Evolution bei europäisch-mediterranen ​Orchideen. Die Orchidee (Sonderheft) 33:15–34Google Scholar
  23. El-Sayed AM (2016) The pherobase: database of pheromones and semio-chemicals
  24. Gaskett AC (2011) Orchid pollination by sexual deception: pollinator perspectives. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 86:33–75CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gaskett AC, Herberstein ME (2010) Colour mimicry and sexual deception by tongue orchids (Cryptostylis). Naturwissenschaften 97:97–102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gaskett AC (2012) Floral shape mimicry and variation in sexually deceptive orchids with a shared pollinator. Biol J Linn Soc 106:469–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gögler J, Stökl J, Sramkova A, Twele R, Francke W, Cozzolino S, Cortis P, Scrugli A, Ayasse M (2009) Ménage à trois-two endemic species of deceptive orchids and one pollinator species. Evolution 63:2222–2234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gögler J, Twele R, Francke W, Ayasse M (2011) Two phylogenetically distinct species of sexually deceptive orchids mimic the sex pheromone of their single common pollinator, the cuckoo bumblebee Bombus vestalis. Chemoecology 21:243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gögler J, Zitari A, Paulus H, Cozzolino S, Ayasse M (2016) Species boundaries in the Ophrys iricolor group in Tunisia: do local endemics always matter? Plant Syst Evol 302:481–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jersáková J, Johnson SD, Kindlmann P (2006) Mechanisms and evolution of deceptive pollination in orchids. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 81:219–235CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Johnson SD (2006) Pollinator driven speciation in plants. In: Harder LD, Barrett SCH (eds) Ecology and evolution of flowers. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 295–310Google Scholar
  32. Kay KM, Sargent RD (2009) The role of animal pollination in plant speciation: integrating ecology, geography, and genetics. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 40:637–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kikuchi DW, Pfennig DW (2013) Imperfect mimicry and limits of natural selection. Q Rev Biol 88:297–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Kullenberg B (1961) Studies in Ophrys pollination. Zool Bidr Upps 34:1–340Google Scholar
  35. Kullenberg B, Bergström G (1973) The pollination of Ophrys orchids. Academic Press, Lidingö, Sweden, New York, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Mant J, Peakall R, Schiestl FP (2005) Does selection on floral odor promote differentiation among populations and species of the sexually deceptive orchid genus Ophrys? Evolution 59:1449–1463CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Mclafferty FW, Turecek F (1993) Interpretation of mass spectra, 4th edn. University Science, Mill WelleyGoogle Scholar
  38. Nass R, Markstädter C, Hauke V, Riederer M (1998) Quantitative gas chromatographic analysis of plant cuticular waxes containing long-chain aldehydes. Phytochem Anal 9:112–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Paulus HF, Gack C (1990) Pollinators as prepollinating isolation factors: evolution and speciation in Ophrys (Orchidaceae). Israel J Bot 39:43–79Google Scholar
  40. Paulus HF, Hirth M (2012) Bestäubungsbiologie und systematik der Ophrys tenthredinifera-gruppe in der Ostägäis (Orchidaceae und Insecta). J Eur Orch 44:625–686Google Scholar
  41. Peakall R, Ebert D, Poldy J, Barrow RA, Francke W, Bower CC, Schiestl FP (2010) Pollinator specificity, floral odour chemistry and the phylogeny of Australian sexually deceptive Chiloglottis orchids: implications for pollinator-driven speciation. New Phytol 188:437–450CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Peakall R, Whitehead MR (2014) Floral odour chemistry defines species boundaries and underpins strong reproductive isolation in sexually deceptive orchids. Ann Bot-London 113:341–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pedersen HÆ, Faurholdt N (2007) Ophrys: the bee orchids of Europe. Kew Royal Botanic Gardens, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  44. Penney HD, Hassall C, Skevington JH, Abbott KR, Sherratt TN (2012) A comparative analysis of the evolution of imperfect mimicry. Nature 483:461–464CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Rakosy D, Streinzer M, Paulus HF, Spaethe J (2012) Floral visual signal increases reproductive success in a sexually deceptive orchid. Arthropod-Plant Inter 6:671–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schiestl FP (2005) On the success of a swindle: pollination by deception in orchids. Naturwissenschaften 92:255–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Schiestl FP, Ayasse M (2002) Do changes in floral odor cause speciation in sexually deceptive orchids? Plant Syst Evol 234:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schiestl FP, Ayasse M, Paulus HF, Löfstedt C, Hansson BS, Ibarra F, Francke W (1999) Orchid pollination by sexual swindle. Nature 399:421–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schiestl FP, Cozzolino S (2008) Evolution of sexual mimicry in the orchid subtribe Orchidinae: the role of preadaptations in the attraction of male bees as pollinators. BMC Evol Biol 8:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schiestl FP, Schlüter PM (2009) Floral isolation, specialized pollination, and pollinator behavior in orchids. Annu Rev Entomol 54:425–446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Schiestl FP (2015) Ecology and evolution of floral volatiles-mediated information transfer in plants. New Phytol 206:571–577CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Scopece G, Musacchio A, Widmer A, Cozzolino S (2007) Patterns of reproductive isolation in Mediterranean deceptive orchids. Evolution 61:2623–2642CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Stökl J, Paulus H, Dafni A, Schulz C, Francke W, Ayasse M (2005) Pollinator attracting odour signals in sexually deceptive orchids of the Ophrys fusca group. Plant Syst Evol 254:105–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. van der Niet T, Peakall R, Johnson SD (2014) Pollinator-driven ecological speciation in plants: new evidence and future perspectives. Ann Bot-London 113:199–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vereecken NJ, Schiestl FP (2008) The evolution of imperfect floral mimicry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:7484–7488CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Vereecken NJ, McNeil JN (2010) Cheaters and liars: chemical mimicry at its finest. Can J Zool 88:725–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weber E (2012) Pollinator attraction in long-horned bee pollinated Ophrys species on Crete. Master thesis. Ulm UniversityGoogle Scholar
  58. Wess A (2015) Pollinator attraction in the sexually deceptive orchid Ophrys bombyliflora. Master thesis. Ulm UniversityGoogle Scholar
  59. Xu S, Schlüter PM, Grossniklaus U, Schiestl FP (2012) The genetic basis of pollinator adaptation in a sexually deceptive orchid. PLoS Genet 8:e1002889CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Xu S, Schlüter PM, Scopece G, Breitkopf H, Gross K, Cozzolino S, Schiestl FP (2011) Floral isolation is the main reproductive barrier among closely related sexually deceptive orchids. Evolution 65:2606–2620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monica Cuervo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Demetra Rakosy
    • 2
  • Carlos Martel
    • 1
  • Stefan Schulz
    • 3
  • Manfred Ayasse
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation GenomicsUlm UniversityUlmGermany
  2. 2.Department of Integrative ZoologyUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria
  3. 3.Institute of Organic ChemistryTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations