Pollinator shift to managed honeybees enhances reproductive output in a bumblebee-pollinated plant

Introduced honeybees have had a large impact on native ecosystems by disrupting native plant–pollinator interactions. However, little is known of the effect of honeybees on reproduction of bumblebee-pollinated plants. Seasonal displacement of native bumblebees by introduced honeybees (Apis mellifera and A. cerana) was observed in Pedicularis densispica, endemic to Hengduan Mountains, China, providing an opportunity for honeybee presence/absence comparisons. Five-year field surveys were conducted in one frequently disturbed population at Yila Pasture (YP). We compared pollination effectiveness (combinations of visitation rate, efficiency in pollen transfer, and potential geitonogamy) between native and introduced managed bees. The total visitation rate of native bees and subsequent reproductive output decreased progressively, but honeybee introduction resulted in at least twofold increase in visitation and 70 % increase in seed set. In general, native bumblebees, which have larger bodies and longer proboscises and spent more time probing single flowers, were more efficient than honeybees in terms of pollen removal and pollen deposition during first visits to virgin flowers. Compared with bumblebees, honeybees visited markedly fewer flowers in sequence within individual plants, potentially reducing geitonogamous pollination. Our data highlight that introduced honeybees can provide pollination service in terms of both quantity and quality for P. densispica. We suggest honeybee introduction as an effective way to augment pollination of P. densispica at disturbed and isolated sites.     

FLORAL BIOLOGY,HUMMINGBIRD POLLINATION AND FRUIT PRODUCTION OF TRUMPET CREEPER (CAMPSIS RADICANS,BIGNONIACEAE)

Trumpet creeper is self-incompatible and bears long, tubular, orange flowers from June to September. Flowering peaks rapidly, then declines and continues at low levels for several weeks. The initial burst of flowering may attract pollinators that return even during subsequent reduced flowering. Most flowers open before noon and nectar production totals 110 μl of 26% sucrose equivalents per flower, an exceptionally high production for a temperate zone plant. Production ceases within 20–30 hr of flower opening, but corollas persist for several days and may serve to attract pollinators. Effective pollination reduces the period of stigma receptivity and speeds closing of stigma lobes. Only 1–9% of flowers produced mature fruits at four sites in Illinois and Missouri. Roughly 400 pollen grains had to be deposited on a receptive stigma to cause fruit development beyond an initial period of high abortion. At two sites, 17% and 89% of stigmas received over 400 pollen grains. Assuming 50% of deposited grains were from the same plant, fruit production at one site was clearly pollinator limited, that at the second site may have been. Ruby-throated Hummingbirds (Archilochus colubris) deposited ten times as much pollen per stigma per visit as honeybees (Apis mellifera) and bumblebees (Bombus spp.). Fruit set was highest where rubythroat visitation was most frequent. Trumpet creeper appears primarily adapted for hummingbird pollination, but can also be adequately pollinated by honeybees and bumblebees. This is one of the first attempts to relate pollen-depositing capabilities of pollinators of any plant to pollen requirements for fruit production. Several characteristics suggest that trumpet creeper may be adapted to pollination at low densities (often called traplining) in its presumed original, woodland, habitat.     

Pollination disruption by European honeybees in the Australian bird-pollinated shrubGrevillea barklyana (Proteaceae)

European honeybees (Apis mellifera) were less efficient pollinators ofGrevillea barklyana than nectar-feeding birds. Nectar-collecting honeybees did not contact reproductive parts of flowers. Pollen-collecting honeybees preferentially visited malestage flowers but rarely visited female-stage flowers. Fruit set on caged inflorescences that allowed access to honeybees but excluded birds was reduced by more than 50% compared to inflorescences that were visited by both types of visitors. Further, fruit set on caged inflorescences was less than on bagged inflorescences that excluded both birds and honeybees, indicating that pollen removal by bees decreased opportunities for delayed autonomous selfing in the absence of birds. Although fruit set was not pollen-limited at the study site, pollen removal by honeybees would decrease fruit set in small populations where birds are scarce. In addition, pollen removal by honeybees would reduce opportunities for outcrossing and reproductive success through male function. Although honeybees have been in Australia for insufficient time to have exerted selection on floral traits, evolutionary shifts in response to these animals are likely to occur in the future.     

Solitary and social bees as pollinators of Wahlenbergia (Campanulaceae): single-visit effectiveness, overnight sheltering and responses to flower colour

Solitary bees often form specialised mutualisms with particular plant species, while honeybees are considered to be relatively opportunistic foragers. Thus, it may be expected that solitary bees are more effective pollinators than honeybees when foraging on the same floral resource. To test this, we studied two Wahlenbergia species (Campanulaceae) in South Africa that are visited by both social honeybees and solitary bees, and which are shown here to be genetically self-incompatible and thus reliant on pollinator visits for seed production. Contrary to expectation, the solitary bee Lipotriches sp. (Halictidae) and social bee Apis mellifera (Apidae), which were the two most frequent visitors to flowers of the study species, were equally effective pollinators in terms of the consequences of single visits for fruit and seed set. Both bee species preferentially visited female phase flowers, which contain more nectar than male phase flowers. Male solitary bees of several genera frequently shelter overnight in flowers of both Wahlenbergia species, but temporal exclusion experiments showed that this behaviour makes little contribution to either seed production or pollen dispersal (estimated using a dye particle analogue). Manipulation of flower colour using a sunscreen that removed UV reflectance strongly reduced visits by both bee groups, while neither group responded to Wahlenbergia floral odour cues in choice tests. This study indicates that while flowers of Wahlenbergia cuspidata and W. krebsii are pollinated exclusively by bees, they are not under strong selection to specialise for pollination by any particular group of bees.     

The bumblebee Bombus ardens ardens (Hymenoptera: Apidae) visits white clover in orchards before Oriental persimmon blooms

Flowers on the ground of orchards can provide substantial resources for wild pollinators of orchard trees. Few studies, however, have examined the relative importance of groundcover flowers to orchard pollination by analyzing pollen on the body surface of pollinators. Oriental persimmon trees bloom within the longer blooming period of white clover, which is occasionally found as a flowering plant on the ground of persimmon orchards in Japan. The present study compared the insect species assemblage collected on persimmon flowers with that on clover. Before persimmon bloomed, Bombus ardens ardens and Apis cerana japonica were the major visitors of clover flowers. Once persimmon bloomed, the former was the most abundant bee that visited persimmon flowers over the flowering period. Apis mellifera was captured only on clover flowers. We found numerous clover pollen grains on the body surface of bumblebees captured on persimmon flowers, but far fewer persimmon pollen grains on bees that visited clover. These findings show that B. ardens ardens utilized the clover flowers under the orchards before persimmon bloomed.     

Intra‐floral resource partitioning between endemic and invasive flower visitors: consequences for pollinator effectiveness

1. Sympatric flower visitor species often partition nectar and pollen and thus affect each other's foraging pattern. Consequently, their pollination service may also be influenced by the presence of other flower visiting species. Ants are solely interested in nectar and frequent flower visitors of some plant species but usually provide no pollination service. Obligate flower visitors such as bees depend on both nectar and pollen and are often more effective pollinators. 2. In Hawaii, we studied the complex interactions between flowers of the endemic tree Metrosideros polymorpha (Myrtaceae) and both, endemic and introduced flower‐visiting insects. The former main‐pollinators of M. polymorpha were birds, which, however, became rare. We evaluated the pollinator effectiveness of endemic and invasive bees and whether it is affected by the type of resource collected and the presence of ants on flowers. 3. Ants were dominant nectar‐consumers that mostly depleted the nectar of visited inflorescences. Accordingly, the visitation frequency, duration, and consequently the pollinator effectiveness of nectar‐foraging honeybees (Apis mellifera) strongly decreased on ant‐visited flowers, whereas pollen‐collecting bees remained largely unaffected by ants. Overall, endemic bees (Hylaeus spp.) were ineffective pollinators. 4. The average net effect of ants on pollination of M. polymorpha was neutral, corresponding to a similar fruit set of ant‐visited and ant‐free inflorescences. 5. Our results suggest that invasive social hymenopterans that often have negative impacts on the Hawaiian flora and fauna may occasionally provide neutral (ants) or even beneficial net effects (honeybees), especially in the absence of native birds.     

Floral biology and pollination in Cucumis melo L., a tropical andromonoecious cucurbit

We studied floral biology and the role of flower visitors in fruit set of muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.). Muskmelon produced Staminate (hereafter ‘S’) and Hermaphrodite (hereafter ‘H’) flowers with a ratio of 18:1. Flowers opened around 40 days after planting and flowering continued for another 40 days. Longevity of both types of flowers was one day. Anthesis in S flowers was earlier (0545–0700 h) than that of H flowers (0700–0830 h). Anther dehiscence occurred 10–15 min after anthesis in both the flowers. The number of pollen grains in H flowers was significantly lower (2715 ± 143) than S flowers (4968 ± 398). Pollen viability and stigma receptivity was maximum between 1600 and 1800 h. The pollen tube of pollen grains from H flowers grew very slowly and never reached the ovary. There were two peaks in nectar production in a day (1000–1200 h and 1400–1800 h). Sixteen species of insects belonging to Hymenoptera (81.25%), Diptera (12.50%) and Lepidoptera (6.5%) visited muskmelon flowers. Major visitors were honeybees, Apis cerana F. and A. florea F. and both were efficient pollinators. Diversity and abundance of flower visitors positively correlated with floral abundance. In pollination exclusion experiments, no fruit set was observed in bagged, self-pollinated and the flowers artificially crossed only with other H pollen. But, those flowers hand pollinated with pollen from S flowers and ones that were allowed for open pollination set maximum fruits. The crop needs a minimum of 8–10 bee visits per flower to achieve the same level of pollination efficiency provided with natural/unrestrained visits.     

Pollinator supplementation mitigates pollination deficits in smallholder avocado (Persea americana Mill.) production systems in Kenya

Avocado (Persea americana Mill.) is a major horticultural crop that relies on insect mediated pollination. In avocado production, a knowledge gap exists as to the importance of insect pollination, especially in East African smallholder farms. In this study, conducted in a leading smallholder avocado production region in Kenya, we assessed the dependence of avocado fruit set on insect pollination and whether current smallholder production systems suffer from a deficit in pollination services. Furthermore, we assessed if supplementation with colonies of the Western honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) to farms mitigated potential pollination deficits. Our results revealed a very high reliance of avocado on insect pollinators, with a significantly lower fruit set observed for self- and wind-pollinated (17.4%) or self-pollinated flowers (6.4%) in comparison with insect-pollinated flowers (89.5%). We found a significant pollination deficit across farms, with hand-pollinated flowers on average producing 20.7% more fruits than non-treated open flowers prior to fruit abortion. This pollination deficit could be compensated by the supplementation of farms with A. mellifera colonies. Our findings suggest that pollination is limiting fruit set in avocado and that A. Mellifera supplementation on farms is a potential option to increase fruit yield.     

Pollination of invasive Eichhornia crassipes (Pontederiaceae) by the introduced honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) in South China

Heterostyly functions as an outcrossing mechanism facilitating accurate pollen transfer from anthers to stigmas of particular heights as a result of the behavior of specialist pollinators. However, heterostylous plants are also visited by generalist pollinators, which may affect the plant–pollinator mutualism. Eichhornia crassipes is a tristylous invasive species, with only the mid- and long-styled morphs (M and L) found in China. We recorded flower-visiting insects in Zhuhai, Zhongshan and Nanning in South China. We hand-pollinated the two morphs to determine their compatibility. In addition, by allowing controlled insect pollination in artificial isoplethically monomorphic and bimorphic populations, we undertook a detailed analysis of pollen deposition between the floral morphs, and fruit and seed set. Ranked by relative abundance, the flower-visiting insects were: Apis mellifera, A. cerana, Lasioglossum sp. and Eristalis arvorum. Hand pollination showed that both the M and L morphs were self-compatible, but the former was probably more so than the latter. Intra-morph pollen transfer by A. mellifera within a population was significantly greater than legitimate pollen transfer between populations, suggesting that the pollen exchange between populations was limited. Seed set of the L morph was significantly greater than that of the M morph in monomorphic populations, indicating intra-morph pollen deposition in the former was higher than in the latter. The results showed that A. mellifera was the major pollinator in South China and able to pollinate E. crassipes legitimately and to promote its fruit and seed set, even though high levels of intra-morph pollination occurred.     

Pollination biology and breeding system in five nocturnal species of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Oenothera</Emphasis> (Onagraceae): reproductive assurance and opportunities for outcrossing

The capacity to produce seed, both by selfing and outcrossing, or mixed mating strategies, is considered a mechanism for overcoming unpredictable pollinator availability. In the present study, we investigate breeding system, insect visitations and the role of insect visitors in the pollination of five species of Oenothera subsect. Oenothera. Field experiments showed that autonomous selfing occurs at bud stage, prior to the opening of the flower. Control flowers showed similar seed set to hand-pollinated flowers, whereas emasculated flowers and those subject to open pollination set fewer seed. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that the investigated Oenothera exhibit a great capacity for autonomous selfing and that selfing is selected in order to provide reproductive assurance. Although flowers were visited mostly by nocturnal lepidopterans, these insects did not precipitate pollination and are thus considered nectar thieves. Conversely, analysis of pollen loads and behavior during foraging by diurnal insect visitors revealed that honeybees and bumblebees are the probable pollinators. We conclude that production of flowers capable of autonomous selfing at bud stage, followed by anthesis and opportunities for outcrossing, probably improves the invasive potential of these Oenothera in Europe, together with a rapid increase in their populations, even when pollinators are scarce.     

Are nectar-robbers mutualists or antagonists?

As exploiters of plant-pollinator mutualisms, nectar-robbers remove rewards (nectar) without providing pollination services. Though one might expect nectar-robbing to be costly to plants, it may instead benefit plants by indirectly increasing pollen dispersal. I investigated the direct effects of nectar-robbing bees (Xylocopa californica) on floral rewards and behaviors of pollinators visiting desert willow (Chilopsis linearis) and indirect effects of robbing on the reproductive success of the plant. Nectar-robbers reduced nectar; while unrobbed and robbed flowers were equally likely to contain nectar, nectar volumes were smaller in robbed flowers with nectar. Apis mellifera (honeybees), ineffective pollinators in terms of pollen deposition, avoided robbed flowers. In contrast, Bombus sonorus (bumblebees), effective pollinators, did not avoid robbed flowers. While bumblebees tended to spend less time in robbed flowers, the time that they spent in flowers was not correlated with pollen deposition. Using powder mimicking pollen, I found that on some days, powder was dispersed farther or to more flowers from robbed flowers, indicating that robbing may sometimes benefit plants by increasing male reproductive success. Powder movement suggested that the effect of robbing on male reproductive success ranged from costly to beneficial. The outcome for flowers that were marked early each morning was a function of prevalence of robbing and abundances of effective pollinators, but not a function of spatial variability among trees in prevalence of robbing or the abundance of ineffective honeybees. Unlike powder dispersal, female reproductive success, measured by fruit set and the number of pollen tubes growing in styles, was not affected by robbing. Thus, robbers did not reduce plants female reproductive success either directly by damaging flowers or indirectly by reducing pollen deposition by pollinators. Overall, this study indicates that nectar-robbers were not often costly to plants, and sometimes even benefited plants.     

Pollinator genetics and pollination: do honey bee colonies selected for pollen‐hoarding field better pollinators of cranberry Vaccinium macrocarpon?

1. Genetic polymorphisms of flowering plants can influence pollinator foraging but it is not known whether heritable foraging polymorphisms of pollinators influence their pollination efficacies. Honey bees Apis mellifera L. visit cranberry flowers for nectar but rarely for pollen when alternative preferred flowers grow nearby. 2. Cranberry flowers visited once by pollen‐foraging honey bees received four‐fold more stigmatic pollen than flowers visited by mere nectar‐foragers (excluding nectar thieves). Manual greenhouse pollinations with fixed numbers of pollen tetrads (0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32) achieved maximal fruit set with just eight pollen tetrads. Pollen‐foraging honey bees yielded a calculated 63% more berries than equal numbers of non‐thieving nectar‐foragers, even though both classes of forager made stigmatic contact. 3. Colonies headed by queens of a pollen‐hoarding genotype fielded significantly more pollen‐foraging trips than standard commercial genotypes, as did hives fitted with permanently engaged pollen traps or colonies containing more larvae. Pollen‐hoarding colonies together brought back twice as many cranberry pollen loads as control colonies, which was marginally significant despite marked daily variation in the proportion of collected pollen that was cranberry. 4. Caloric supplementation of matched, paired colonies failed to enhance pollen foraging despite the meagre nectar yields of individual cranberry flowers. 5. Heritable behavioural polymorphisms of the honey bee, such as pollen‐hoarding, can enhance fruit and seed set by a floral host (e.g. cranberry), but only if more preferred pollen hosts are absent or rare. Otherwise, honey bees' broad polylecty, flight range, and daily idiosyncrasies in floral fidelity will obscure specific pollen‐foraging differences at a given floral host, even among paired colonies in a seemingly uniform agricultural setting.     

Nectar robbing improves male reproductive success of the endangered Aconitum napellus ssp. lusitanicum

Nectar robbery is usually thought to impact negatively on the reproductive success of plants, but also neutral or even positive effects have been reported. Very few studies have investigated the effects of nectar robbing on the behaviour of legitimate pollinators so far. Such behavioural changes may lead to the reduction of geitonogamy or to increased pollen movement. We simulated nectar robbing in experimental sites as well as in natural populations of Aconitum napellus ssp. lusitanicum, a rare plant pollinated by long-tongued bumblebees. In an experimental setup, we removed the nectaries of 40 % of the flowers, which is similar to rates of robbing observed in wild populations. Patches of plants with experimentally robbed flowers were compared with control patches containing plants with untreated flowers. We observed pollinator behaviour, mimicked male reproductive success (pollen dispersal) using fluorescent dye, and measured female reproductive success (seed set). The main legitimate visitors were bumblebees while honeybees were often observed robbing nectar. They did so by “base working”, i.e. sliding between tepals. Bumblebees tended to visit fewer flowers per plant and spent less time per single flower when these had been experimentally robbed. This change in behaviour consequently increased the proportion of flowers visited by bumblebees in patches with robbed flowers. Fluorescent dye mimicking pollen flow was dispersed larger distances after pollinators had visited patches with robbed flowers compared to control patches. Average seed set per plant was not affected by nectar robbing. Our results demonstrated that A. napellus does not suffer from nectar robbery but may rather benefit via improved pollen dispersal and thus, male reproductive success. Knowledge on such combined effects of behavioural changes of pollinators due to nectar robbery is important to understand the evolutionary significance of exploiters of such mutualistic relationships between plants and their pollinators.     

Pollination Services Provided by Bees in Pumpkin Fields Supplemented with Either Apis mellifera or Bombus impatiens or Not Supplemented

Pollinators provide an important service in many crops. Managed honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are used to supplement pollination services provided by wild bees with the assumption that they will enhance pollination, fruit set and crop yield beyond the levels provided by the wild bees. Recent declines in managed honey bee populations have stimulated interest in finding alternative managed pollinators to service crops. In the eastern U.S., managed hives of the native common eastern bumble bee (Bombus impatiens Cresson) may be an excellent choice. To examine this issue, a comprehensive 2-yr study was conducted to compare fruit yield and bee visits to flowers in pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo L.) fields that were either supplemented with A. mellifera hives, B. impatiens hives or were not supplemented. We compared pumpkin yield, A. mellifera flower visitation frequency and B. impatiens flower visitation frequency between treatments. Results indicated that supplementing pumpkin fields with either A. mellifera or B. impatiens hives did not increase their visitation to pumpkin flowers or fruit yield compared with those that were not supplemented. Next, the relationship between frequency of pumpkin flower visitation by the most prominent bee species (Peponapis pruinosa (Say), B. impatiens and A. mellifera) and fruit yield was determined across all pumpkin fields sampled. Fruit yield increased as the frequency of flower visits by A. mellifera and B. impatiens increased in 2011 and 2012, respectively. These results suggest that supplementation with managed bees may not improve pumpkin production and that A. mellifera and B. impatiens are important pollinators of pumpkin in our system.     

Low legitimate pollen flow in distylic Turnera hermannioides (Passifloraceae) and its consequences on fruit and seed set

Turnera hermannioides is a ruderal distylic subshrub, native to NE-Brazil. In the Catimbau National Park, situated within the semi-arid Caatinga region, we studied the pollination ecology of this species, emphasizing (1) effective pollinators; (2) characteristics of short- and long-styled flowers; (3) intra- and intermorph pollen flow; and (4) fruit and seed set. Short and long-styled morphs differ in pollen size and ornamentation, stigmatic surface, style and stamen length and nectar production. The flowers are obligate intermorphic outcrossers and depend on animals for pollination. The flowers of T. hermannioides attracted insect visitors of 25 species, among them butterflies, beetles, but mainly bees. Polylectic bees, such as Apis mellifera, stingless bees, and solitary Callonychium brasiliense were the most frequent visitors and the principal pollinators. The frequency of visits, however, was very low (on average 1.9 visits/flower/day), resulting in a low and unbalanced legitimate pollen flow, i.e. a much lower number of pollen grains from short-styled flowers reaching stigmas of long-styles than vice versa, which in turn compromised fruit and seed set. Surprisingly, Protomeliturga catimbaui and P. turnerae, both oligolectic on flowers of the Turneraceae-clade of the Passifloraceae s.l., were very rare flower visitors and did not contribute significantly to the pollination of Turnera hermannioides. We discuss how the low visitation rate and the inefficiency of pollinators (i.e. inefficiency in promoting legitimate pollination) compromise pollen flow and, consequently, fruit and seed set in this species.     

Influence of functional traits on foraging behaviour and pollination efficiency of wild social and solitary bees visiting coffee (Coffea canephora) flowers in Uganda

An on-farm pollination experiment was conducted during the June–August and November–February blooming seasons of 2007 to 2008, in 30 small-scale coffee fields characterised by different habitat and vegetation types. The study was conducted in order to determine the best pollinator groups for coffee in Uganda and to collect relevant field information and determine the pollination efficiency of different bee species. Results indicate that across blooming seasons, coffee flowers were visited by 24–36 bee species. Hypotrigona gribodoi was the most frequent flower visitor, comprising over 60% of 5941 bee-visits recorded. Foraging rate and pollination speed varied among bee species. Solitary bees foraged on more flowers than social bees, but they spent less time per flower visited. Solitary bees visited more coffee trees and fields, but deposited less pollen, whereas social bees visited less trees and coffee fields in the landscape, but deposited more pollen on flowers. Fruit set was of 87%, 64% and 0.9%, respectively, in hand-cross pollination, open pollination and controlled-pollination treatments. Fruit abortion due to self-pollination was insignificant in this study. There was variability in pollination efficiency of different bee species. Pollination efficiency varied more significantly with sociality than with other bee functional traits and was not significantly influenced by tongue length and bee body size. Single-flower visits by social and solitary bees resulted in 89.7% and 68.14% fruit set, respectively. The most efficient bee species was Meliponula ferruginea (98.3%) followed by Meliponula nebulata (97.1%). Thus, very good pollinator species were wild social bees (mainly stingless bees) as opposed to honeybees and solitary bees that were previously reported to be the best pollinators of coffee in Panama and Indonesia. Morphological and anatomical characteristics of the bee pollen storage features may explain the difference in foraging behaviour activities and in pollination efficiency of social and solitary afrotropical bee species visiting lowland coffee in Uganda. In addition, pollination efficiency was influenced by land-use intensity, field management systems and habitat types found in the immediate surroundings of coffee fields, but not by coffee field size, coffee genotypes and mass blooming wild vegetation. It is recommended to farmers to adopt pollinator-friendly conservation and farming practices such as keeping an uncultivated portion (25%–30%) of their farms as pollinator reservoirs, protecting semi-natural habitats found in the vicinity of coffee fields, as well as promoting high on-farm tree cover to benefit a functionally diverse pollinator community.     

Change of floral orientation affects pollinator diversity and their relative importance in an alpine plant with generalized pollination system,Geranium refractum (Geraniaceae)

Floral orientation may affect pollinator attraction and pollination effectiveness, and its influences may differ among pollinator species. We, therefore, hypothesized that, for plant species with a generalized pollination system, changes in floral orientation would affect the composition of pollinators and their relative contribution to pollination. Geranium refractum, an alpine plant with downward floral orientation was used in this study. We created upward-facing flowers by altering the flower angle. We compared the pollinator diversity, pollination effectiveness, and pollinator importance, as well as female reproductive success between flowers with downward- and upward-facing orientation. Results indicated that the upward-facing flowers were visited by a wider spectrum of pollinators (classified into functional groups), with higher pollinator diversity than natural flowers. Moreover, due to influences on visitation number and pollen removal, the pollinator importance exhibited by the main pollinator groups differed between flower types. Compared with natural flowers, the pollination contribution of principal pollinators (i.e., bumblebees) decreased in upward-facing flowers and other infrequent pollinators, such as solitary bees and muscoid flies, removed more pollen. Consequently, stigmatic pollen loads were lower in upward- than in downward-facing flowers. These findings reveal that floral orientation may affect the level of generalization of a pollination system and the relative importance of diverse pollinators. In this species, the natural downward-facing floral orientation may increase pollen transfer by effective pollinators and reduce interference by inferior pollinators.     

Novel nectar robbing negatively affects reproduction in Digitalis purpurea

With many plant–pollinator interactions undergoing change as species’ distributions shift, we require a better understanding of how the addition of new interacting partners can affect plant reproduction. One such group of floral visitors, nectar robbers, can deplete plants of nectar rewards without contributing to pollination. The addition of nectar robbing to the floral visitor assemblage could therefore have costs to the plant´s reproductive output. We focus on a recent plant colonist, Digitalis purpurea, a plant that in its native range is rarely robbed, but experiences intense nectar robbing in areas it has been introduced to. Here, we test the costs to reproduction following experimental nectar robbing. To identify any changes in the behavior of the principal pollinators in response to nectar robbing, we measured visitation rates, visit duration, proportion of flowers visited, and rate of rejection of inflorescences. To find the effects of robbing on fitness, we used proxies for female and male components of reproductive output, by measuring the seeds produced per fruit and the pollen export, respectively. Nectar robbing significantly reduced the rate of visitation and lengths of visits by bumblebees. Additionally, bumblebees visited a lower proportion of flowers on an inflorescence that had robbed flowers. We found that flowers in the robbed treatment produced significantly fewer seeds per fruit on average but did not export fewer pollen grains. Our finding that robbing leads to reduced seed production could be due to fewer and shorter visits to flowers leading to less effective pollination. We discuss the potential consequences of new pollinator environments, such as exposure to nectar robbing, for plant reproduction.     

Can ants equal honeybees as effective pollinators of the energy crop Jatropha curcas L. under Mediterranean conditions?

Jatropha curcas L. is the subject of many research and breeding programs concerned with its potential as an oil crop for biodiesel production. Despite an increasing amount of information regarding this relatively new crop, pollination requirements of this plant are largely neglected. The aim of the study was to evaluate the relative significance of ants and honeybees as potential pollinators of J. curcas grown under Mediterranean conditions. Jatropha curcas plants bloomed throughout the summer and fall, peaking twice, in early summer and late fall. During this period, the plants were visited by 70 species of insects representing 45 families from seven orders, with most species rarely being observed. Ants and Honeybees were the most common species, accounting for >95% of all flower visits. The foraging behavior of the honeybees followed the pattern of bloom phenology, especially during the summer, and mostly promoted cross‐pollination. Ants on the other hand, mostly promoted self pollination showing no such correlative behavior, reacting often too late to nectar availability, and were highly susceptible to climatic changes. Pollinator exclusion treatments revealed that during summer, fruit and seed sets, as well as seed size and oil and protein contents, were relatively similar for ant and bee‐pollinated flowers. During fall, however, reproductive success of bee‐pollinated flowers was relatively high (66%), while fruit set of ant‐pollinated flowers was significantly reduced from 71 to 11%. In conclusion, while both groups are equal in their pollination effectiveness in the summer, during the fall the honeybees are almost the sole pollinators of the plant. Based on bloom phenology and pollination activity data, the honeybees are responsible for the pollination of more than 80% of the annual reproductive potential of J. curcas, under Mediterranean conditions.     

Effectiveness of nectarivorous birds and honeybees as pollinators of Banksia spinulosa (Proteaceae)

Abstract The effectiveness of nectarivorous birds and honeybees (Apis mellifera) as pollinators of Banksia spinulosa (Proteaceae) was investigated. Birds visited inflorescences in the early, mid and late flowering seasons. In contrast, honeybees visited only on days in the late flowering period when maximum temperatures exceeded 15°C. Self pollen remained on pollen presenters of flowers for up to 5 days in the early and mid periods. In the late period, when honeybees visited inflorescences, self pollen was removed within 2 days. Pollen removal was similar for caged (birds excluded) and open inflorescences in the late period, indicating that most pollen was removed by honeybees. In the early and mid periods, honeyeaters pollinated 22% and 27% of flowers on open inflorescences, respectively. In the late period, when both birds and bees visited inflorescences, 64–73% of flowers on open inflorescences were pollinated. Foraging by honeybees resulted in pollen deposition as 38% of flowers on caged inflorescences were pollinated. Throughout the flowering season a similar number of pollen grains was deposited per stigma. There were 3.0–3.7 pollen grains per stigma on open inflorescences in the late period, although only 2.0 grains per stigma on caged inflorescences. In the early and mid periods, fewer caged than open inflorescences produced fruits, indicating the importance of honeyeaters to reproductive success at these times. In contrast, in the late period when honeybees visited inflorescences, fruit-set was similar on caged and open inflorescences. Overall, these results indicate that honeybees were effective pollinators of B. spinulosa.