Skip to main content
Log in

Determinants of fruit set in Yucca whipplei: Reproductive expenditure vs. pollinator availability

  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The number of flowers produced by inflorescences of Yucca whipplei (Agavaceae) consistently exceeds the number of fruits produced by about one order of magnitude. To determine the factors responsible for low fruit set, the relation between pollinator availability, the amount of resources spent on reproduction (as indicated by inflorescence size), and the number of fruits matured was studied during 1978 and 1979 at 18 locations in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and desert scrub communities of southern California.

The following results support the conclusion that pollinators do not usually limit fruit production in Yucca whipplei. Rather, fruit production is limited by the amount of resources available to support developing fruits. (1) Fruit production is positively correlated with inflorescence size both within and between populations. The average size of inflorescence for a population is an excellent predictor of mean fruit production. Furthermore, 54% of the total variance in fruit production of individual plants can be explained by inflorescence size. (2) In contrast, although fruit production within most populations is positively correlated with an index of the number of pollinator visits to an inflorescence, the relative abundance of pollinators for a population is a poor predictor of mean fruit production, and only 9% of the total variance in fruit production can be explained by the visitation index. Furthermore, at four sites studied for two years, there was little change in average inflorescence size or fruit production from 1978 to 1979, despite large differences in relative abundance of pollinators at each of the sites. (3) Based on geographic proximity, and physiographic and vegetational similarities, study sites were grouped into regional clusters. Both inflorescence size and fruit production varied considerably between regions. Of the total variation in fruit production, 27% can be attributed to differences between regions. Most of this variation is the result of regional differences in inflorescence size, which in turn influence fruit production.

Why does Yucca whipplei produce such large inflorescences if so few fruits can be supported? Two relevant hypotheses are discussed: (1) the floral display is the result of selection for pollen dissemination at the expense of fruit set; and (2) the floral display is the result of selection for a bet-hedging strategy either to increase the probability of adequate pollination when pollinators are unusually rare, or to allow individuals to support more fruits when resources are unusually abundant.

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

  • Aker C, Udovic D (1981) Oviposition and pollination behavior of the yucca moth Tegeticula maculata (Lepidoptera: Proxidae), and its relation to the reproductive biology of Yucca whipplei (Agavaceae). Oecologia, in press

  • Baker HG, Baker I (1975) Studies of nectar-constitution and pollinator-plant coevolution. In: LE Gilbert, PH Raven (eds) Coevolution of Animals and Plants. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, p 100–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Kodric-Brown A (1979) Convergence, competition and mimicry in a temperate community of hummingbird pollinated flowers. Ecology 60:1022–1035

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1979) Simultaneous hermaphroditism and sexual selection. Proc Nat Acad Sci US 76:2480–2484

    Google Scholar 

  • Faegri K, vander Pijl L (1971) The principles of pollination ecology, 2nd ed., pp 291, Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankie GW (1975) Tropical forest phenology and pollinator plant coevolution. In: LE Gilbert, PH Raven (eds) Coevolution of Animals and Plants. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, p 192–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Free JB (1970) Insect Pollination of Crops. Academic Press NY, pp 544

    Google Scholar 

  • Goh BS (1979) Stability in models of mutualism. American Naturalist 113:261–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines L (1941) Variation in Yucca whipplei. Madrono 6:33–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison AT, Small E, Mooney HA (1971) Drought relationships and distribution of two mediterranean-climate California plantcommunities. Ecology 52:869–875

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B, Raven PH (1972) Energetics and pollination ecology. Science 176:597–602

    Google Scholar 

  • Heithaus ER (1974) The role of pollinator-plant interactions in determining community structure. Ann Mo Bot Garden 61:675–691

    Google Scholar 

  • Lioyd DG (1979) Parental strategies of angiosperms. New Zealand J Bot 17:595–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Lioyd DG (1980) Sexual strategies in plants. I. An hypothesis of serial adjustment of maternal investment during one reproductive session. New Phytologist, 86:69–79

    Google Scholar 

  • May RM (1976) Models for two interacting populations. In: RM May (ed) Theoretical Ecology: Principles and Applications. Saunders, Philadelphia, PA, p 49–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (1977) The sex habit in plants and animals. In: FB Christiansen, TM Fenchel (eds) Measuring Selection in Natural Populations. Springer Verlag, New York Berlin Heidelberg, p 315–331

    Google Scholar 

  • McGregor SE (1959) Cotton-flower visitation and pollen distribution by honey bees. Science 129:97–98

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvie SD (1947) Yuccas of the Southwestern United States. Part II, Harvard Univ, Cambridge: Arnold Arboretum, pp 192

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosquin T (1971) Competition for pollinators as a stimulus for the evolution of flowering time. Oikos 22:398–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Munz PA (1973) A California Flora and Supplement. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 1681–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishida T (1963) Ecology of the pollinators of passion fruit. Tech Bull Hawaii Agric Exp Stn 55

  • Fowell JA, Mackie RA (1966) Biological interrelationships of moths and Yucca whipplei. Univ of Calif Publ in Entomol 42:1–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley CV (1892) The yucca moth and Yucca pollination. Ann Rept Missouri Bot Garden 3:99–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Sehaffer WM (1979) Equivalence of maximizing reproductive value und fitness in the case of reproductive strategies. Proc Nat Acad Sci US 76:3567–3569

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer WM, Gadgil MD (1976) Selection for optimal life history strategies in plants. In: ML Coly, JM Diamond (eds) Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA, p 142–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer WM, Schaffer MV (1977) The adaptive significance of variations in reproductive habit in Agavaceae. In: B Stonehouse (ed) Evolutionary Ecology. Univ Park Press, College Park MD, p 261–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer WM, Schaffer MV (1979) The adaptive significance of variations in reproductive habit in the Agavaceae. II: Pollinator foraging behavior and selection for increased reproductive expenditure. Ecology 60:1051–1069

    Google Scholar 

  • Schemske DW (1977) Flowering phenology and seed set in Claytonia virginica (Portulacaceae). Bull Torrey Botanical Club 104:254–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Schemske DW (1980) The evolution of floral display in the orchid Brassavola nodosa. Evolution 34:489–494

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson AG (1979) An evolutionary examination of the floral display of Catalpa speciosa (Bignoniaceae). Evolution 33:1200–1209

    Google Scholar 

  • Trelease W (1893) Further studies of yuccas and their pollination. Ann Rept Missouri Bot Garden 4:181–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Udovic D, Aker C 1981 Fruit abortion and the regulation of fruit number in Yucca whipplei. Oecologia, in press

  • Vandermeer JH, Boucher DH (1978) Varieties of mutualistic interaction in population models. Journal of Theoretical Biology 74:549–558

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasek FC, Thorne RF (1977) Transmontane coniferous vegetation. In: MG Barbour, J Major (eds) Terrestrial vegetation of California. Wiley and Sons, New York, p 797–832

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser NM (1978) Competition for pollination and sequential flowering in two Colorado wild flowers. Ecology 59:934–944

    Google Scholar 

  • Webber JM (1953) Yuccas of the Southwest. US Dept Agric Monogr 17: pp 9

    Google Scholar 

  • Willson MF (1979) Sexual selection in plants. American Naturalist 113:777–790

    Google Scholar 

  • Willson MF, Price PW (1977) The evolution of inflorescence size in Asclepias (Asclepiadaceae). Evolution 31:495–511

    Google Scholar 

  • Willson MF, Rathke B (1974) Adaptive design of the floral display in Asclepias syriaca L. American Midland Naturalist 92:47–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimber DR (1958) Pollination of Yucca whipplei Torr. Masters thesis, Calremont College (unpublished)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Udovic, D. Determinants of fruit set in Yucca whipplei: Reproductive expenditure vs. pollinator availability. Oecologia 48, 389–399 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00346500

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00346500

Keywords

Navigation