The consequences of rewardlessness in orchids: reward-supplementation experiments with Anacamptis morio (Orchidaceae)

Pollinators are expected to respond to low reward availability in an inflorescence by visiting fewer flowers before departure, thus potentially causing reduced visitation, but also reduced geitonogamous selfing. I tested this hypothesis using Anacamptis morio, an orchid that does not reward its pollinators. Supplementation of inflorescences with artificial nectar did not result in an increase in fruit set on supplemented inflorescences compared to control inflorescences and tended to reduce pollinia removal. Supplementation resulted in reduced fruit quality, but there was no evidence that this was as a result of inbreeding depression. Behavioral experiments showed that pollinating bumble bees, as predicted, visited more flowers on supplemented inflorescences. Bumble bees also deposited more self-pollen on supplemented inflorescences, but this was marginally significant. Bumble bee queens removed significantly more pollinia from control inflorescences, while Bombus terrestris and B. lucorum workers did not. I conclude that while pollinators behaved as predicted, there was weak evidence that pollinia removal, pollen deposition, and fruit set followed the predictions of the hypothesis. I argue that this was probably because some pollinators were more efficient at removing and depositing pollen on control inflorescences, while others were not.     

草乌花蜜产量的梯度分布及熊蜂自下而上的访花行为

收益降低假说(declining reward hypothesis)认为熊蜂自下而上的访花顺序是对花蜜产量的直接响应,先访问下部花蜜产量高的花可以获得更多的收益;花开口方向假说认为自下而上访花是因为熊蜂更容易看见其上部的花朵。为了验证上述两个假说,我们于2008年8月在北京小龙门国家森林公园调查了红光熊蜂(Bombus ignitus)访问草乌(Aconitum kusnezoffii)直立和倒立顶生花序的访问顺序,测量了直立花序下部雌性阶段花和上部雄性阶段花花蜜的糖浓度、体积,计算了花蜜中的糖含量。结果表明,红光熊蜂在直立花序和倒立花序内均以向上运动为主,分别占总运动次数的62.77%和68.35%;直立花序下部雌性阶段花花蜜糖浓度比上部雄性阶段花低1.44%,但是花蜜体积和花蜜中的糖含量都显著高于雄性阶段的花。由于熊蜂访问倒立花序时先访问的是下部的低回报雄性阶段的花,然后再访问上部高回报的雌性阶段的花,这与收益降低假说矛盾,表明红光熊蜂自下而上访问草乌直立花序可能不是受到花蜜产量的调节。     

Habitat structure and animal movement: the behaviour of bumble bees in uniform and random spatial resource distributions

Foraging organisms (like bumble bees) move between resource points (like flowers) whose natural distributions vary enormously: from hyperdispersed to random to clumped. These differences in habitat structure may significantly influence the fitness of both plant and pollinator. To examine the effect of habitat structure on pollinator movement and fitness, we observed captive worker bumble bees collecting nectar from artificial flowers containing equal volumes of reward and arranged in two spatial configurations: a hexagonal array with constant distances between flowers (“constant”), and an “exploded hexagonal” array, with variable distances between flowers (“variable”). The mean nearest-neighbour distance was the same in both arrays, as was the general hexagonal appearance. The experiment therefore compares how resource dispersion, independent of nearest-neighbour distance, influences bee behaviour. Bees in the variable array showed decreased directionality, higher revisitation frequencies, and greater inter-flower flight distances than shown in the constant array. As a consequence, bees in the variable array had a 19% lower gross rate of nectar collection. Our results suggest that wild-foraging bees should prefer regularly spaced flowers (when all else, including mean nearest-neighbour distance, is equal), and that plants can decrease self-pollination by regular spacing between flowers, inflorescences, or individuals. Received: 16 January 1996 / Accepted: 30 June 1997     

Risk‐averse inflorescence departure in hummingbirds and bumble bees: could plants benefit from variable nectar volumes?

Most hermaphroditic, many-flowered plants should suffer reduced fitness from within-plant selfing (geitonogamy). Large inflorescences are most attractive to pollinators, but also promote many flower visits during a single plant visit, which may increase selfing and decrease pollen export. A plant might avoid the negative consequences of attractiveness through modification of the floral display to promote fewer flower visits, while retaining attractiveness. This report shows that increasing only the variance in nectar volume per flower results in fewer flower visits per inflorescence by wild hummingbirds ( Selasphorus rufus ) and captive bumble bees ( Bombus flavifrons ) foraging on artificial inflorescences. Inflorescences were either constant (all flowers contained the same nectar volume) or variable (half the flowers were empty, the other half contained twice as much nectar as in the constant flowers). Both types of inflorescence were simultaneously available to foragers. Risk-averse foraging behaviour was expressed as a patch departure preference: birds and bees visited fewer flowers on variable inflorescences, and this preference was expressed when resource variability could be determined only by concurrent sampling. When variance treatments were clearly labelled with colour and offered to hummingbirds, the departure effect was maintained; however, when preference was measured by inflorescence choice, birds did not consistently prefer to visit constant inflorescences. The reduced visitation lengths on variable inflorescences by both birds and bees documented in this study imply that variance in nectar production rates within inflorescences may represent an adaptive trait to avoid the costs of geitonogamy.     

Economic motivation for plant species preferences of pollen-collecting bumble bees

1. Pollen is an essential resource for bees as it provides the proteins needed for larval development and growth. Bumble bees typically collect pollen from a limited subset of the available plant species, indicating that bees perceive qualitative and/or quantitative differences between species. Because bumble bees typically exhibit different foraging behaviours when collecting pollen than when collecting nectar, and often visit different plant species, the economics of pollen collection are subject to unique benefits and costs.
2. The influences of pollen standing crop, grain volume, protein content and foraging costs on the choice of plant species by pollen-collecting bumble bees were assessed. Pollen was collected from different plant species available to bees and these species were ranked according to eleven currencies that differentially incorporate these influences on foraging economics.
3. Comparison of observed preferences at three sites with species rankings based on foraging currencies revealed that bumble bees do not assess plant species based solely on intrafloral characteristics. Instead, pollen-foraging bumble bees are sensitive to protein availability at the site as a whole as well as foraging costs, and forage in a manner that maximizes the site-specific efficiency of protein collection (protein collected/energetic costs). Such behaviour would promote proper larval development while maximizing forager lifespan.     

Choice of flowers by foraging honey bees (Apis mellifera): possible morphological cues

Abstract.

• 1 Honey bees foraging for nectar on lavender (Lavandula stoechas) chose inflorescences with more of their flowers open. The number of open flowers predicted whether an inflorescence was visited by bees, inspected but rejected, or ignored. Inflorescences chosen arbitrarily by observers had numbers of open flowers intermediate between those of visited and ignored inflorescences.
• 2 Differences in morphological characters between types of inflorescence correlated with nectar volume and sugar weight per flower so that visited inflorescences had a disproportionately greater volume of nectar and weight of sugar per flower and greater variance in nectar volume.
• 3 Although there were significant associations between nectar content and the morphological characters of inflorescences, discriminant function analysis revealed discrimination on the basis of morphology rather than nectar content.
• 4 Visited inflorescences tended to have smaller than average flowers but bees tended to probe the largest flowers on visited inflorescences.
• 5 Choice of flowers within inflorescences is explicable in terms of the relationship between flower size and nectar content.

     

Remote perception of floral nectar by bumblebees

Summary On both artificial flowers in the laboratory and certain plant species in the field, bumblebees often closely approached flowers and then departed without probing for nectar. In laboratory experiments where nectar rewards were associated with subtle visual or olfactory cues, bumblebees approached and avoided non-rewarding flowers. Flowers that bees entered and probed for nectar contained rewards much more frequently than predicted by chance alone. When there were no external cues associated with nectar content, bees visited rewarding flowers by chance alone, provided rewarding flowers were not spatially clumped. In the field, bumblebees approached and rejected a large proportion of dogbane flowers and red clover inflorescences. On both species, flowers or inflorescences probed by bees contained more nectar than those rejected by bees or those that I chose at random. On fireweed and monkshood, bees rarely or never approached and rejected healthy-looking flowers. Predictions generated by an optimal foraging model were tested on data from four bumblebee species foraging on red clover. The model was highly successful in qualitatively predicting the relationship between handling time and proportion of inflorescences rejected by individual bees, and the relationship between threshold nectar content for acceptance by bees and average resource availability. Thus, bees appeared to use remotely perceived cues to maximize their rates of nectar intake.     

Pollen foraging by bumblebees: Foraging patterns and efficiency on Lupinus polyphyllus

Summary Bumblebees foraging on vertical inflorescences start near the bottom and work upward, behavior commonly interpreted as a response to the greater amounts of nectar available in lower flowers. Lupinus polyphyllus, which produces no nectar, has more pollen available in upper flowers. Although bees are probably unable to detect this gradient, since pollen is hidden from their view, they still start low and forage upward. Therefore, we concluded that the bees' tendency to forage upward on vertical inflorescences is not tied to a reward gradient. In addition, bees use only about 15% of the flowers per inflorescence, although they could be much more efficient by visiting and revisiting every flower systematically. In general, revisits would not be penalized because most flowers contain enough pollen for several visits. Optimal foraging theory may not offer an adequate explanation for such gross inefficiency.     

Flower choice by honey bees (Apis mellifera L.): sex-phase of flowers and preferences among nectar and pollen foragers

Bees foraging for nectar should choose different inflorescences from those foraging for both pollen and nectar, if inflorescences consist of differing proportions of male and female flowers, particularly if the sex phases of the flowers differ in nectar content as well as the occurrence of pollen. This study tested this prediction using worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) foraging on inflorescences of Lavandula stoechas. Female flowers contained about twice the volume of nectar of male flowers. As one would predict, bees foraging for nectar only chose inflorescences with disproportionately more female flowers: time spent on the inflorescence was correlated with the number of female flowers, but not with the number of male flowers. Inflorescence size was inversely correlated with the number of female flowers, and could be used as a morphological cue by these bees. Also as predicted, workers foraging for both pollen and nectar chose inflorescences with relatively greater numbers of both male and female flowers: time spent on these inflorescences was correlated with the number of male flowers, but not with the number of females flowers. A morphological cue inversely associated with such inflorescences is the size of the bract display. Choice of flowers within inflorescences was also influenced predictably, but preferences appeared to be based upon corolla size rather than directly on sex phase.     

Carpenter Bee (Xylocopa micans) Risk Indifference and a Review of Nectarivore Risk-sensitivity Studies

This paper presents new results of risk-sensitive foraging studiesof the carpenter bee, Xylocopa micans, and reviews the workto date on risk sensitivity in nectarivores. In the field, nectarivoreschoose among alternative food sources (flowers) that differin the variabilities of their nectar rewards. In the lab, theforaging situation for carpenter bees was experimentally simplifiedby offering the bees a choice between either "low variance"or "high variance" artificial flowers. The two flower typesdiffered in their variabilities but offered the same expectedshortterm rates of net energy gain to test the predictions ofthe short-term rate maximization mechanism. Foragers were testedunder two energy budget conditions, hungry and well-fed, totest the predictions of the z-score model. Individual carpenterbees were indifferent to variability in both nectar volume andnectar sugar concentrations, and their risk-indifference wasunaffected by energy budget. These findings of risk indifferencesupport neither the variance discounting nor the z-score modelof risk sensitivity. Since the low and high variance flowertypes are equivalent for carpenter bees in short-term rate ofenergy gain, there can be no selection on carpenter bees tobe sensitive to variability based on differences in rate ofgain. Studies of risk sensitivity in honey bees and bumble beesusing variance in nectar concentration support this contention.These findings are compared with other nectarivore risk sensitivitystudies in order to highlight the most likely mechanisms underlyingaversion to variation in nectar rewards (short-term rate maximizing,the Weber-Fechner law of perception and learning non-empty flowers)and to suggest future research in the interplay of these threemechanisms.     

The effects of a bumble bee nectar robber on plant reproductive success and pollinator behavior

Interactions between a plant species (Corydalis caseana), a bumble bee nectar robber (Bombus occidentalis), and a bumble bee pollinator (B. appositus) were studied. There were no significant differences between naturally robbed and unrobbed flowers in fruit set or mean seed set per fruit. Plots of C. caseana plants were subjected to treatments of robbing and no robbing using commercially available colonies of B. occidentalis. Robbers did not pollinate the flowers. Pollinator behavior was observed to determine (1) the number of bees attracted to each plot, (2) the number of inflorescences visited in a plot, (3) the number of flowers visited on each inflorescence, and (4) the distance flown between inflorescences. There were no significant differences in the number of inflorescences visited per bee or the number of flowers visited per inflorescence per bee when robbed and unrobbed treatments were compared. Of the parameters measured, only distance flown between inflorescences differed in the robbed and the unrobbed treatments. Bees flew significantly further between inflorescences in the robbed plots than in the unrobbed plots. The results indicate that the nectar robbers have no negative effect on fruit set or seed set in C. caseana and that they may cause increased pollen flow distances by changing the behavior of the pollinator.     

Combined effects of inflorescence architecture, display size, plant density and empty flowers on bumble bee behaviour: experimental study with artificial inflorescences

Pollen dispersal by pollinators is governed by the extent to which diverse effects on pollinator behaviour act independently or augment or moderate each other. Using artificial inflorescences, we assessed the behavioural responses of bumble bees to inflorescence architecture (raceme, panicle, and umbel), inflorescence size (7 or 13 flowers), inter-inflorescence distance and the proportion of empty flowers per inflorescence. The advantage of large inflorescences in terms of attractiveness was larger for racemes and umbels than for panicles, whereas the effect of inter-inflorescence distance on the number of successive probes was smaller for racemes than for panicles and umbels. The number of flowers probed per visit increased almost proportionally with display size when fewer flowers were empty, whereas the number increased less when many flowers were empty. Our results suggest that display size and the spatial arrangement of flowers and nectar within inflorescences can contribute to efficient pollination by affecting pollinator behaviour interactively.     

Morphological correlates of nectar production used by honeybees

Abstract.  1. Honeybees foraging on lavender have been shown to choose inflorescences that are larger and have more flowers. If they are selecting optimally then these inflorescences should yield higher net rates of energy gain. The number and distribution of flowers within inflorescences is a complex function of age, however, which might itself influence nectar quality and availability.
2. Sampling of the overnight nectar secretion of visited and unvisited inflorescences showed that younger inflorescences with more flowers produced more sugar per flower and had fewer unproductive flowers than other inflorescences, but the size of the inflorescence had no effects.
3. Overall display size attracted bees to inspect inflorescences, as inflorescences that were inspected but rejected were larger and/or had larger or more bracts than those that were ignored. Bees, however, accepted more productive inflorescences based on different cues: inflorescence age and number of flowers.
4. Inflorescence choice thus appeared to reflect a two-stage decision process based on different morphological criteria at each stage.     

Floral color change in Weigela middendorffiana (Caprifoliaceae): reduction of geitonogamous pollination by bumble bees

We examined the significance of retaining color-changed flowers in pollination success of Weigela middendorffiana through a single visit of bumble bees. Inner parts of flowers changed color with age from yellow to red. In an investigation of the mating system, duration of each color phase, reproductive ability of each of the color-phase flowers, and the effects of color-changed flowers on bumble bee behavior (1) flowers of this species were self-incompatible, (2) color-changed flowers provided little reward to pollinators and little residual reproductive ability, (3) the timing of floral color change was delayed with the progress of flowering season within individual plants, while the duration of the red phase shortened with the progress of flowering season, and (4) red-phase flowers did not attract bumble bees at a distance but did contribute to reducing the number of successive flower visits during a single stay within the plants. Red-phase flowers seemed to indicate the low reward level of old flowers and functioned as a cue to discourage pollinators from staying longer on the same plant. Our results predict that the retention of color-changed flowers without sexual function can enhance the pollination success of a whole plant through male function by reducing successive flower visits during a single stay of pollinators, i.e., geitonogamous pollination.     

Bees use honest floral signals as indicators of reward when visiting flowers

Pollinators visit flowers for rewards and should therefore have a preference for floral signals that indicate reward status, so called ‘honest signals’. We investigated honest signalling in Brassica rapa L. and its relevance for the attraction of a generalised pollinator, the bumble bee Bombus terrestris (L.). We found a positive association between reward amount (nectar sugar and pollen) and the floral scent compound phenylacetaldehyde. Bumble bees developed a preference for phenylacetaldehyde over other scent compounds after foraging on B. rapa. When foraging on artificial flowers scented with synthetic volatiles, bumble bees developed a preference for those specific compounds that honestly indicated reward status. These results show that the honesty of floral signals can play a key role in their attractiveness to pollinators. In plants, a genetic constraint, resource limitation in reward and signal production, and sanctions against cheaters may contribute to the evolution and maintenance of honest signalling.     

Effects of variation in inflorescence size and floral rewards on the visitation rates of traplining pollinators ofAralia hispida

Summary In field experiments withAralia hispida inflorescences, the following variables were manipulated: number of umbels per inflorescence, number of flowers per umbel, and amounts of pollen and nectar per flower. Visitation rates by bumble bees, the principal pollinators, were then observed. In the reward-variation experiments, bees appeared to learn the positions of nectar-rich shoots, and visited them significantly more often than nectar-poor shoots. They did not respond to similar variation in pollen production. The nectar preferences developed slowly after the treatments were imposed, and bees continued to favor sites that had been occupied by nectar-rich shoots even after the treatments were discontinued. Visitation rate was approximately proportional to flower number, making it unlikely that increases in inflorescence size produced a disproportionate gain in male reproductive success (a necessary condition in certain models for the evolution of dioecy). For a fixed number of flowers per inflorescence, bees preferred inflorescences with more umbels. In pairwise choice tests of male-phase and female-phase umbels of various sizes, bees preferred male-phase umbels and larger umbels; the preference for male-phase umbels is stronger in bees that had previously fed on male-phase umbels.     

Pollination ecology of Christmas Bells (Blandfordia nobilis): Patterns of standing crop of nectar

Standing crop of nectar (both volume and sugar concentrations) was measured from flowers in a population of Blandfordia nobilis. Nectar in this honeyeater-pollinated species was extremely viscous during one flowering season and averaged approximately 95% sugar, while it averaged only 25% sugar two seasons later. Nectar volume was significantly and negatively correlated with sugar concentration on nine often sampling dates. There was no significant relationship between either nectar volume or sugar concentration and a number of measures of plant size (inflorescence height, numbers of open flowers, buds, spent flowers and total flowers). Similarly, no consistent relationship was found between measures of flower size and reward level. There were significant positive correlations between the reward (both volume and sugar concentration) offered by blossoms on the same plant. The nectar volume of flowers from nearest neighbouring inflorescences were significantly and positively correlated with one another on three of six occasions while the sugar concentrations of those blossoms were significantly correlated on just two of six sampling dates. There was no significant difference in reward (both volume and sugar concentration) between open flowers and those bagged to exclude pollinators. There was significant heterogeneity in the nectar volumes offered by plants to pollinators during a single flowering season.     

Pollination ecology of Anthyllis vulneraria subsp. vulgaris (Fabaceae): nectar robbers as pollinators

This paper examines the hypothesis that nectar robbing can affect plant reproductive success either positively or negatively. To this end, I investigated various aspects of the pollination ecology of a population of the herb Anthyllis vulneraria subsp. vulgaris in northwest Spain over 5 yr. By observing floral visitors, I found that the most important pollinator species was the long-tongued bee Anthophora acervorum, which accounted for ～45% of recorded insect visits. However, just over 45% of visits were by the nectar-robbing bumble bees Bombus terrestris and B. jonellus. Although the incidence of robbing differed considerably over 5 yr of study, the frequency in every season was very high (66.4-76.5% of robbing) except for 1997 (0% robbing). Despite this high frequency of robbing, robbed flowers had a higher probability of setting fruit than nonrobbed flowers in all years of the study (mean: 82.0 vs. 51.0%; excluding 1997). This increased fruit set in robbed flowers is directly related to bumble bee behavior because the robbers' bodies came into contact with both the anthers and stigmas while robbing. Thus, the robbers effect pollination. These results suggest that the effect of nectar robbers on plant reproductive success is dependent both on the robbers' behavior and on flower/inflorescence structure. The importance of nectar-robbing bumble bees on the reproductive success of A. vulneraria and its yearly high frequency suggest that the relationship between robbers and this plant is part of a successful long-term mutualism.     

Choice of food resource by bees and ants (Hymenoptera: Apoidea,Formicidae) on coconut tree inflorescences (Cocos nucifera,Arecaceae)

Coconut trees are mostly anemophilous; however, because bees and ants forage on coconut tree inflorescences for floral food, entomophilous pollination can also occur. The aim of this study was to determine the food resource preference of bees and ants while they collect pollen, nectar and, for ants, occasionally prey on coconut tree inflorescences, as well as to evaluate their impact on self-pollination. The number of ant visits to first female and then male flowers is significantly higher than that of bees. For Apis mellifera (L.) and Pseudomyrmex gracilis (Fabricius) 14% of the sequences were favorable to direct self-pollination. The probability of visits for all of the sequences was similar for both bees and ants and there was no difference in resource choice. For these reasons, neither can be considered a more effective pollinator of the coconut tree.     

Competition for nectar resources does not affect bee foraging tactic constancy

1. Competition alters animal foraging, including promoting the use of alternative resources. It may also impact how animals feed when they are able to handle the same food with more than one tactic. Competition likely impacts both consumers and their resources through its effects on food handling, but this topic has received little attention. 2. Bees often use two tactics for extracting nectar from flowers: they can visit at the flower opening, or rob nectar from holes at the base of flowers. Exploitative competition for nectar is thought to promote nectar robbing. If so, higher competition among floral visitors should reduce constancy to a single foraging tactic as foragers will seek food using all possible tactics. To test this prediction, field observations and two experiments involving bumble bees visiting three montane Colorado plant species (Mertensia ciliata, Linaria vulgaris, Corydalis caseana) were used under various levels of inter- and intra-specific competition for nectar. 3. In general, individual bumble bees remained constant to a single foraging tactic, independent of competition levels. However, bees that visited M. ciliata in field observations decreased their constancy and increased nectar robbing rates as visitation rates by co-visitors increased. 4. While tactic constancy was high overall regardless of competition intensity, this study highlights some intriguing instances in which competition and tactic constancy may be linked. Further studies investigating the cognitive underpinnings of tactic constancy should provide insight on the ways in which animals use alternative foraging tactics to exploit resources.