Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reproductive success in varying light environments: direct and indirect effects of light on plants and pollinators

  • Plant-Animal Interactions - Original Paper
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Plant populations often exist in spatially heterogeneous environments. Light level can directly affect plant reproductive success through resource availability or by altering pollinator behavior. It can also indirectly influence reproductive success by determining floral display size which may in turn influence pollinator attraction. We evaluated direct and indirect effects of light availability and measured phenotypic selection on phenological traits that may enhance pollen receipt in the insect-pollinated herb Campanulastrum americanum. In a natural population, plants in the sun had larger displays and received 7 times more visits than plants in the shade. Using experimental arrays to separate the direct effects of irradiance on insects from their response to display size, we found more visits to plants in the sun than in the shade, but no association between number of visits each flower received and display size. Plants in the sun were not pollen limited but pollen-augmented shade flowers produced 50% more seeds than open-pollinated flowers. Phenological traits, which may influence pollen receipt, were not under direct selection in the sun. However, earlier initiation and a longer duration of flowering were favored in the shade, which may enhance visitation in this pollen-limited habitat.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abe T (2001) Flowering phenology, display size, and fruit set in understory dioecious shrub, Acuba japonica (Cornaceae). Am J Bot 88:455–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson S (1991) Floral display and pollination success in Achillea ptarmica (Asteraceae). Holarctic Ecol 14:186–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashman TL, Morgan MT (2004) Explaining phenotypic selection on plant attractive characters: male function, gender balance or ecological context? Proc R Soc Lond B 271:553–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashman TL, Knight TM, Steets JA, Amarasekare P, Burd M, Campbell DA, Dudash MR, Johnston MO, Mazer SJ, Mitchell RJ, Morgan MT, Wilson WG (2004) Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85:2408–2421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop JA, Armbruster WS (1999) Thermoregulatory abilities of Alaskan bees: effects of size, phylogeny and ecology. Funct Ecol 13:711–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom AJ, Chapin III FS, Mooney HA (1985) Resource limitation in plants—an economic analogy. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 16:363–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond WJ (1994) Do mutualisms matter? Assessing the impact of pollinator and disperser disruption on plant extinction. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 344:83–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody AK (1997) Effects of pollinators, herbivores, and seed predators on flowering phenology. Ecology 78:1624–1631

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess KS, Etterson JR, Galloway LF (2007) Artificial selection shifts flowering phenology and other correlated traits in an autotetraploid herb. Heredity 99:641–648

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Caruso CM (2000) Competition for pollination influences selection on floral traits of Ipomopsis aggregata. Evolution 54:1546–1557

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Comba L (1999) Patch use by bumblebees (Hymenoptera apidae): temperature, wind, flower density and traplining. Ethol Ecol Evol 11:243–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conner JK, Rush S (1996) Effects of flower size and number on pollinator visitation to wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum. Oecologia 105:509–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domínguez CA, Dirzo R (1995) Rainfall and flowering synchrony in a tropical shrub: variable selection on the flowering time of Erythroxylum havanense. Evol Ecol 9:204–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evanhoe L, Galloway LF (2002) Floral longevity in Campanula americana (Campanulaceae): a comparison of morphological and functional gender phases. Am J Bot 89:587–591

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris MA (1988) Quantitative genetic variation and natural selection in Cleome serrulata growing along a mild soil moisture gradient. Can J Bot 66:1870–1876

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloway LF (2005) Maternal effects provide phenotypic adaptation to local environmental conditions. New Phytol 166:93–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Galloway LF, Cirigliano T, Gremski K (2002) The contribution of display size and dichogamy to potential geitonogamy in Campanula americana. Int J Plant Sci 163:133–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleeson SK, Tilman D (1992) Plant allocation and the multiple limitation hypothesis. Am Nat 139:1322–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grindeland JM, Sletvold N, Ims RA (2005) Effects of floral display size and plant density on pollinator visitation rate in a natural population of Digitalis purpurea. Funct Ecol 19:383–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groom MJ (1998) Allee effects limit population viability of an annual plant. Am Nat 151:487–496

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gross RS, Werner PA (1983) Relationships among flowering phenology, insect visitors, and seed-set of individuals: experimental studies on four co-occurring species of goldenrod (Solidago: Compositae). Ecol Monogr 53:95–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggerty BP (2006) Responses to growing season length in the American bellflower, Campanulastrum americanum: implications for climate change. M.S. thesis, University of Virginia, Va.

  • Haig D, Westoby M (1988) On limits to seed production. Am Nat 131:757–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen V-I, Totland Ø (2006) Pollinator visitation, pollen limitation, and selection on flower size through female function in contrasting habitats within a population of Campanula persicifolia. Can J Bot 84:412–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich B (1993) The hot-blooded insects, 1st edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera CM (1995a) Floral biology, microclimate, and pollination by ectothermic bees in an early-blooming herb. Ecology 76:218–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera CM (1995b) Microclimate and individual variation in pollinators: flowering plants are more than their flowers. Ecology 76:1516–1524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera CM (1997) Thermal biology and foraging responses of insect pollinators to the forest floor irradiance mosaic. Oikos 78:601–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalisz S (1986) Variable selection on the timing of germination in Collinsia verna (Scrophulariaceae). Evolution 40:479–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearns CA, Inouye DW, Waser NM (1998) Endangered mutualisms: the conservation of plant–pollinator interactions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29:83–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly CA (1992) Spatial and temporal variation in selection on correlated life-history traits and plant size in Chamaecrista fasiculata. Evolution 46:1658–1673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechowicz MJ, Bell G (1991) The ecology and genetics of fitness in forest plants. II. Microspatial heterogeneity of the edaphic environment. J Ecol 79:687–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liow HL, Sodhi NS, Elmqvist T (2001) Bee diversity along a disturbance gradient in tropical lowland forests of south-east Asia. J Appl Ecol 38:180–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd DG (1992) Self-fertilization and cross-fertilization in plant. II. The selection of self-fertilization. Int J Plant Sci 153:370–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConnaughay KDM, Coleman JS (1999) Biomass allocation in plants: ontogeny or optimality? A test along three resource gradients. Ecology 80:2581–2593

    Google Scholar 

  • Moeller DA, Geber MA (2005) Ecological context of the evolution of self-pollination in Clarkia xantiana: population size, plant communities, and reproductive assurance. Evolution 59:786–799

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newmark WD (2001) Tanzanian forest edge microclimatic gradients: dynamic patterns. Biotropica 33:2–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez J, Jordano D, Haeger JF (1994) Spatial heterogeneity in a butterfly: host–plant interactions. J Anim Ecol 63:31–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart SC, Scoen DJ (1987) Pattern of phenotypic viability and fecundity selection in a natural population of Impatiens pallida. Evolution 41:1290–1301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute (2005) SAS/STAT version 9.1. SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Totland Ø (2001) Environment-dependent pollen limitation and selection on floral traits in an alpine species. Ecology 82:2233–2244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhoenacker D, Ågren J, Ehrlén J (2006) Spatio-temporal variation in pollen limitation and reproductive success of two scape morphs in Primula farinosa. New Phytol 169:615–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Widén B (1991) Phenotypic selection on flowering phenology in Senecio intergrifolius, a perennial herb. Oikos 61:205–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright JW, Meagher TR (2003) Pollination and seed predation drive flowering phenology in Silene latifolia (Caryophyllaceae). Ecology 84:2062–2073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman M, Pyke GH (1988) Reproduction in Polemonium: assessing the factors limiting seed set. Am Nat 131:723–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Tim Kugler for work conducting array experiments, MLBS for logistical support, and NSF DBI-0453380 REU-sites for support to MLBS and DEB-0316298 to L. F. G. All experiments comply with the current laws of the United States of America.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 22904-4328, USA

    Francis F. Kilkenny & Laura F. Galloway

Authors
  1. Francis F. Kilkenny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura F. Galloway
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francis F. Kilkenny.

Additional information

Communicated by Louis Pitelka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kilkenny, F.F., Galloway, L.F. Reproductive success in varying light environments: direct and indirect effects of light on plants and pollinators . Oecologia 155, 247–255 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-007-0903-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-007-0903-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation