Acta Biologica Hungarica

, Volume 66, Issue 2, pp 231–241 | Cite as

Factors Affecting Reproductive Success in Three Entomophilous Orchid Species in Hungary

  • Anna E. VojtkóEmail author
  • Judit Sonkoly
  • Balázs András Lukács
  • Attila Molnár V.


The reproductive success of orchids is traditionally estimated by determining the fruit-set of individuals. Here, we investigated both the fruit and the seed production of three orchid species and the factors that may affect individual fruit-set, like pollination strategy, individual traits or the annual amount of precipitation. The species [Dactylorhiza sambucina (L.) Soó, Dactylorhiza majalis (Rchb.) P. F. Hunt & Summerhayes and Platanthera bifolia (L.) L. C. M. Richard] were studied in three consecutive years (2010–2012) in the Bükk Mountains, Hungary. All three species were proved to be non-autogamous by a bagging experiment. Data analyses showed significant differences between seed numbers but not between fruit-sets of species. There was no statistical difference in individual reproductive success between wet and dry years, however, the effect of the annual amount of precipitation is significant on the population level. Comparison of published fruit-set data revealed accordance with our results in P. bifolia, but not in D. sambucina and D. majalis. We assume that the surprisingly high fruit-set values of the two Dactylorhiza species may be due to the fact that the pollination crisis reported from Western European countries is not an actual problem in the Bükk Mountains, Hungary.


Dactylorhiza majalis Dactylorhiza sambucina fruit-set Platanthera bifolia pollination crisis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ackerman, J. D. (1989) Limitations to sexual reproduction in Encyclia krugii (Orchidaceae). Syst. Bot. 14, 101–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ackerman, J. D., Zimmerman, J. (1994) Bottlenecks in the life histories of orchids: resources, pollination, population structure, and seedling establishment. In Pridgeon, A. M. (ed.) Proceedings of the 14th World Orchid Conference. Edinburgh, pp. 138–147.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biesmeijer, J. C., Roberts, S. P. M., Reemer, M., Ohlemüller, R., Edwards, M., Peeters, T., Schaffers, A. P., Potts, S. G., Kleukers, R., Thomas, C. D., Settele, J., Kunin, W. E. (2006) Parallel declines in pollinators and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and the Netherlands. Science 313, 351–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biró, É., Bódis, J., Nagy, T., Tökölyi, J., Molnár, V. A. (2015) Honeybee (Apis mellifera) mediated increased reproductive success of a rare deceptive orchid. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 13, 181–192.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bódis, J., Molnár, E. (2009) Long-term monitoring of Himantoglossum adriaticum H. Baumann population in Keszthely Hills, Hungary. Natura Somogyiensis 15, 27–40.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brys, R., Jacquemyn, H., Hermy, M. (2008) Pollination efficiency and reproductive patterns in relation to local plant density, population size, and floral display in the rewarding Listera ovata (Orchidaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 157, 713–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brzosko, E. (2003) The dynamics of island populations of Platanthera bifolia in the Biebrza National Park (NE Poland). Ann. Bot. Fenn. 40, 243–253.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Calvo, L. N. (1990) Inflorescence size and fruit distribution among individuals in three orchid species. Am. J. Bot. 77, 1378–1381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Claessens, J., Kleynen, J. (2011) The Flower of the European Orchid. Form and Function. Jean Claessens and Jacques Kleynen.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cole, F. R., Firmage, D. H. (1984) The floral ecology of Platanthera blephariglottis. Am. J. Bot. 71, 700–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dafni, A., Ivri, Y. (1979) Pollination ecology of, and hybridisation between Orchis coriophora L. and O. collina Sol. ex Russ. (Orchidaceae) in Israel. New Phytol. 83, 181–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ellenberg, H. (1974) Indicator values of vascular plants in central Europe. Scripta Geobotanica 9, 1–97.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hansen, I., Olensen, J. M. (1999) Comparison of reproductive success in two orchids: the nectarless Dactylorhiza majalis s.s. and the nectar-producing Gymnadenia conopsea s.l. Nordic J. Bot. 19, 665–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hungarian Central Statistical Office (2013) Main data of the meteorological observation stations. [accessed 19.09.2013]Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jacquemyn, H., Brys, R., Hermy, M., Willems, J. H. (2005) Does nectar reward affect rarity and extinction probabilities of orchid species? An assessment using historical records from Belgium and the Netherlands. Biol. Conserv. 121, 257–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jacquemyn, H., Brys, R., Honnay, N., Hermy, M. (2008) Effects of coppicing on demographic structure, fruit and seed set in Orchis mascula. Basic Appl. Ecol. 9, 392–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson, S. D., Torninger, E., Ågren, J. (2009) Relationships between population size and pollen fates in a moth-pollinated orchid. Biol. Letters 5, 282–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnson, S. D., Hollens, M., Kuhlmann, M. (2012) Competition versus facilitation: conspecific effects on pollinator visitation and seed set in the iris Lapeirousia oreogena. Oikos 121, 545–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnston, M. O. (1991) Natural selection on floral traits in two species of lobelia with different pollinators. Evolution 45, 1468–1479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kindlmann, P., Jersáková, J. (2006) Effect of floral display on reproductive success in terrestrial orchids. Folia Geobot. 41, 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Klinkhamer, P. G. L, de Jong, T. J., de Bruyn, G. L. (1989) Plant size and pollinator visitation in Cynoglossum officinale. Oikos 54, 201–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Klinkhamer, P. G. L., de Jong, T. J. (1990) Effects of plant size, plant density and sex differential nectar reward on pollinator visitation in the protandrous Echium vulgare (Boraginaceae). Oikos 57, 399–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lamont, B. B., Klinkhamer, P. G. L., Witkowski, E. T. F. (1993) Population fragmentation may reduce fertility to zero in Banksia goodii: a demonstration of the Allee effect. Oecologia 94, 446–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maad, J. (2000) Phenotypic selection in hawkmoth-pollinated Platanthera bifolia: Targets and fitness surfaces. Evolution 54, 112–123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mattila, N., Kuitunen, M. T. (2000) Nutrient versus pollination limitation in Platanthera bifolia and Dactylorhiza incarnata (Orchidaceae). Oikos 89, 360–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mitchell, R. J. (1994) Effects of floral traits, pollinator visitation, and plant size on Ipomopsis aggregate fruit production. Am. Nat. 143, 870–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nazarov, V. V. (1998) Samen produktivität europäischer Orchideen. I. Methoden zur Bestimmung der Samenzahl. Jour. Eur. Orch. 30, 591–602.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neiland, M. R. M., Wilcock, C. C. (1998) Fruit set, nectar reward, and rarity in the Orchidaceae. Am. J. Bot. 85, 1657–1671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    O’Connell, L. M., Johnston, M. O. (1998) Male and female pollination success in a deceptive orchid, a selection study. Ecology 79, 1246–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ohashi, K., Yahara, T. (1998) Effects of variation in flower number on pollinator visits in Cirsium purpuratum (Asteraceae). Am. J. Bot. 85, 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pellegrino, G., Caimi, D., Noce, M. E., Musacchio, A. (2005) Effects of local density and flower colour polymorphism on pollination and reproduction in the rewardless orchid Dactylorhiza sambucina (L.) Soó. Plant Syst. Evol. 251, 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Phillips, R. D., Peakall, R., Hutchinson, M. F., Linde, C. C., Xu, T., Dixon, K. W., Hopper, S. D. (2014) Specialized ecological interactions and plant species rarity: The role of pollinators and mycorrhizal fungi across multiple spatial scales. Biol. Cons. 169, 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Robertson, A. W., Macnair, M. R. (1995) The effects of floral display size on pollinator service to individual flowers of Myosotis and Mimulus. Oikos 72, 106–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sabat, A. M., Ackerman, J. D. (1996) Fruit set in a deceptive orchid: the effect of flowering phenology, display size, and local floral abundance. Am. J. Bot. 83, 1181–1186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sonkoly, J. E., Vojtkó, A., Török, P., Illyés, Z., Sramkó, G., Tökölyi, J., Molnár, V. A. (2015). Higher seed number compensates for lower fruit-set of deceptive orchids. J. Ecol. (submitted)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tremblay, R. L., Ackerman, J. D., Zimmerman, J. K., Calvo, R. N. (2005) Variation in sexual reproduction in orchids and its evolutionary consequences: a spasmodic journey to diversification. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 84, 1–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2015

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna E. Vojtkó
    • 1
    Email author
  • Judit Sonkoly
    • 2
  • Balázs András Lukács
    • 1
  • Attila Molnár V.
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Tisza Research, Danube Research InstituteMTA Centre for Ecological ResearchDebrecenHungary
  2. 2.Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversity of DebrecenDebrecenHungary
  3. 3.Department of Botany, Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversity of DebrecenDebrecenHungary

Personalised recommendations