Skip to main content
Log in

Sources of variation in pollinator contribution within a guild: the effects of plant and pollinator factors

  • Community Ecology
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Among plants visited by many pollinator species, the relative contribution of each pollinator to plant reproduction is determined by variation in both pollinator and plant traits. Here we evaluate how pollinator movement among plants, apparent pollen carryover, ovule number, resource limitation of seed set, and pollen output affect variation in contribution of individual pollinator species to seed set in Lithophragma parviflorum (Saxifragaceae), a species visited by a broad spectrum of visitors, including beeflies, bees and a moth species. A previous study demonstrated differences among visitor species in their single-visit pollination efficacy but did not evaluate how differences in visitation patterns and pollen carryover affect pollinator efficacy. Incorporation of differential visitation patterns and pollen carryover effects —commonly cited as potentially important in evaluating pollinator guilds — had minor effects (0–0.6% change) on the estimates of relative contribution based on visit frequency and single-visit efficacy alone. Beeflies visited significantly more flowers per inflorescence than the bees and the moth. Seed set remained virtually constant during the first three visited flowers for beeflies and larger bees, indicating that apparent pollen carryover did not reduce per-visit efficacy of these taxa. In contrast, Greya moth visits showed a decrease in seed set by 55.4% and the smaller bees by 45.4% from first to second flower. The larger carryover effects in smaller bees and Greya were diminished in importance by their small overall contribution to seed set. Three variable plant traits may affect seed set: ovule number, resource limitation on seed maturation, and pollen output. Ovule number per flower declined strongly with later position within inflorescences. Numbers were much higher in first-year greenhouse-grown plants than in field populations, and differences increased during 3 years of study. Mean pollen count by position varied 7-fold among flowers; it paralleled ovule number variation, resulting in a relatively stable pollen:ovule ratio. Resource limitation of seed set increased strongly with later flowering, with seed set in hand-pollinated flowers ranging from 66% in early flowers to 0% in the last two flowers of all plants. Variation in ovule number and resource limitation of seed maturation jointly had a strong effect on the number of seeds per flower. Visitation to early flowers had the potential to cause more seed set than visitation to later flowers. Overall, the most important sources of variation to seed production contribution were differences among pollinators in abundance and absolute efficacy (ovules fertilized on a single visit) and potentially differential phenology among visitor species. These effects are likely to vary among populations and years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Campbell DR (1985) Pollen and gene dispersal: the influences of competition for pollination. Evolution 39: 418–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DR (1991) Effects of floral traits on sequential components of fitness in Ipomopsis aggregata. Am Nat 137: 713–737

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DR, Motten AF (1985) The mechanism of competition for pollination between two forest herbs. Ecology 66: 554–563

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DR, Waser NM, Price MV, Lynch EA, Mitchell RJ (1991) Components of phenotypic selection: pollen export and flower corolla width in Ipomopsis aggregata. Evolution 45: 1458–1467

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig JL (1989) Seed set in Phormium: interactive effects of pollinator behaviour, pollen carryover and pollen source. Oecologia 81: 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Daubenmire R (1970) Steppe vegetation of Washington. Wa Agric Expt Sta Tech Bull 62

  • Dieringer G (1992) Pollinator effectiveness and seed set in populations of Agalinis strictifolia (Scrophulariaceae). Am J Bot 79: 1018–1023

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudash MR (1991) Plant size effects on female and male function in hermaphroditic Sabatia angularis (Gentianaceae). Ecology 72: 1004–1012

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellison RL, Thompson JN (1987) Variation in seed and seedling size: the effects of seed herbivores on Lomatium grayi (Umbelliferae). Oikos 49: 269–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Evenhuis NL, Tabet AB (1981) The Bombylius albicapillus group (Diptera: Bombyliidae) of the Nearctic Region, with key and description of new species. Ann Entomol Soc Am 74: 200–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Galen C (1989) Measuring pollinator-mediated selection on morphometric floral traits: bumble-bees and the alpine sky pilot, Polemonium viscosum. Evolution 43: 882–890

    Google Scholar 

  • Geber MA (1985) The relationship of plant size to self-pollination in Mertensia ciliata. Ecology 66: 762–772

    Google Scholar 

  • Harder LD (1990) Pollen removal by bumble bees and its implications for pollen dispersal. Ecology 71: 1110–1125

    Google Scholar 

  • Harder LD, Thomson JD (1989) Evolutionary options for maximizing pollen dispersal of animal-pollinated plants. Am Nat 133: 323–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera CM (1987) Components of pollinator “quality”: comparative analysis of a diverse insect assemblage. Oikos 50: 79–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera CM (1988) Variation in mutualisms: the spatio-temporal mosaic of a pollinator assemblage. Biol J Linn Soc 35: 95–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera CM (1989) Pollinator abundance, morphology, and flower visitation rate: analysis of the “quantity” component in a plantpollinator system. Oecologia 80: 241–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Hessing MB (1988) Geitonogamous pollination and its consequences in Geranium caespitosum. Am J Bot 75: 1324–1333

    Google Scholar 

  • Horvitz CC, Schemske DW (1990) Spatiotemporal variation in insect mutualists of a neotropical herb. Ecology 71: 1085–1097

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe HF (1984) Constraints on the evolution of mutualisms. Am Nat 123: 746–777

    Google Scholar 

  • Janzen DH (1980) When is it coevolution? Evolution 34: 611–612

    Google Scholar 

  • Jong T de, Waser NM, Price MV, Ring RM (1992) Plant size, geitonogamy and seed set in Ipomopsis aggregata. Oecologia 89: 310–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Jong TJ de, Waser NM, Klinkhamer PGL (1993) Geitonogamy —the neglected side of selfing. Trends Ecol Evol 8: 321–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn JR, Waser NM (1985) The effect of Delphinium nelsonii pollen on seed set in Ipomopsis aggregata, a competitor for hummingbird pollination. Am J Bot 72: 1144–1148

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey AH (1984) Reproductive biology of Apiaceae. I. Floral visitors to Thaspium and Zizia and their importance in pollination. Am J Bot 71: 375–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubbers AE, Christensen NL (1986) Intraseasonal variation in seed production among flowers and plants of Thalictrum thalictroides (Ranunculaceae). Am J Bot 73: 190–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Motten AF (1983) Reproduction of Erythronium umbilicatum (Liliaceae), pollination success and pollinator effectiveness. Oecologia 59: 351–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Motten AF, Campbell DR, Alexander DE, Miller HL (1981) Pollination effectiveness of specialist and generalist visitors to a North Carolina population of Claytonia virginica. Ecology 62: 1278–1287

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellmyr O (1987) Temporal patterns of ovule allocation, fruit set, and seed predation in Anemonopsis macrophylla (Ranunculaceae). Bot Mag is (Tokyo) 100: 175–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellmyr O, Thompson JN (1992) Multiple occurrences of mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. Proc Natl Acad Sci 89: 2927–2929

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettersson MW (1991) Pollination by a guild of fluctuating moth populations: option for unspecialization in the bladder campion, Silene vulgaris. J Ecol 79: 591–604

    Google Scholar 

  • Price MV, Waser NM (1982) Experimental studies of pollen carryover: hummingbirds and Ipomopsis aggregata. Oecologia 54: 353–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson AW (1992) The relationship between floral display size, pollen carryover and geitonogamy in Myosotis colensoi (Kirk) Macbride (Boraginaceae). Biol J Linn Soc 46: 333–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Schemske DW (1983) Limits to specialization and coevolution in plant-animal muttualisms. In: Nitecki M (ed) Coevolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 67–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Schemske DW, Horvitz CC (1984) Variation among floral visitors in pollination ability: a precondition for mutualism specialization. Science 225: 519–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton M, Young HJ, Ellstrand NC, Clegg JM (1991) Consequences of floral variation for male and female reproduction in experimental populations of wild radish, Raphanus sativus L. Evolution 45: 268–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden EA (1986) Anthecology and pollinator efficacy of Styrax officinale subsp. redivivum (Styracaceae). Am J Bot 73: 919–930

    Google Scholar 

  • Svensson L (1985) An estimate of pollen carryover by ants in a natural population of Scleranthus perennis L. (Caryophyllaceae). Oecologia 66: 373–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor RL (1965) The genus Lithophragma (Saxifragaceae). Univ Calif Publ Bot 37: 1–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JN (1982) Interaction and coevolution. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JN (1994) The coevolutionary process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JN, Pellmyr O (1992) Mutualism with pollinating seed parasites amid co-pollinators: constraints on specialization. Ecology 73: 1780–1791

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson JD (1985) Pollination and seed set in Diervilla lonicera (Caprifoliaceae): temporal patterns of flower and ovule deployment. Am J Bot 72: 737–740

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson JD (1986) Pollen transport and deposition by bumble bees in Erythronium: influences of floral nectar and bee grooming. J Ecol 74: 329–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson JD, Plowright RC (1980) Pollen carryover, nectar rewards, and pollinator behavior with special reference to Diervilla lonicera. Oecologia 46: 68–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson JD, Thomson BA (1989) Dispersal of Erythronium grandiflorum pollen by bumblebees: implications for gene flow and reproductive success. Evolution 43: 657–661

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM (1982) A comparison of distances flown by different visitors to flowers of the same species. Oecologia 55: 251–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM, Price MV (1984) Experimental studies of pollen carryover: effects of floral variability in Ipomopsis aggregata. Oecologia 62: 262–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM, Price MV (1990) Pollination efficiency and effectiveness of bumble bees and hummingbirds visiting Delphinium nelsonii. Coll Bot 19: 9–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson P, Thomson JD (1991) Heterogeneity among floral visitors leads to discordance between removal and deposition of pollen. Ecology 72: 1503–1507

    Google Scholar 

  • Young HJ (1988) Differential importance of beetle species pollinating Dieffenbachia longispatha (Araceae). Ecology 69: 832–844

    Google Scholar 

  • Young HJ, Stanton ML (1990a) Influences of floral variation on pollen removal and seed production in wild radish. Ecology 71: 536–547

    Google Scholar 

  • Young HJ, Stanton ML (1990b) Temporal patterns of gamete production within individuals of Raphanus sativus (Brassicaceae). Can J Bot 68: 480–486

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olle Pellmyr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pellmyr, O., Thompson, J.N. Sources of variation in pollinator contribution within a guild: the effects of plant and pollinator factors. Oecologia 107, 595–604 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00333953

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00333953

Key words

Navigation