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.     

Association of flower color with pollen reward may explain increased bumblebee visitation to the Scotch broom yellow morph

Given that pollinators usually visit flowers for hidden rewards, they need to rely on floral traits that indicate reward status (“honest signals”). However, the relationship between pollination, honest signals, and floral rewards is little documented in natural conditions. The Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) is an invasive shrub with polymorphism in the color of its flowers that can be yellow, orange, or red. In three areas dominated by the Scotch broom, we described the abundance of the floral morphs and estimated bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) visitation rate. We examined whether bumblebee visitation to the floral morphs was related to pollen reward. We collected flowers and classified their stamens according to their function: reward or pollen export. Then, we measured anther size and estimated pollen quantity. The yellow morph was more abundant and more visited by bumblebees than the orange and red morphs. The yellow flowers did indeed offer more pollen than the other morphs and this occurred only for rewarding anthers, suggesting that bumblebees could use yellow color as an honest signal to visit the most rewarding flowers. We discuss whether innate and/or learned preferences of bumblebees can explain why the yellow morph is more visited, pollinated, and abundant, while the other morphs are maintained at a lower frequency. This is one of the few field works that shows that variation in intra-specific floral traits is associated with variation in floral reward and pollinator visitation rate, helping to understand the foraging preferences of pollinators and the coexistence of floral morphs in nature.

Clinical trials registration: Not applicable.

     

The co-optimization of floral display and nectar reward

In most insect-pollinated flowers, pollinators cannot detect the presence of nectar without entering the flower. Therefore, flowers may cheat by not producing nectar and may still get pollinated. Earlier studies supported this ‘cheater flower’ hypothesis and suggested that the cost saving by cheater flowers could be the most predominant selective force in the evolution of nectarless flowers. Previous models as well as empirical studies have addressed the problem of optimizing the proportion of nectarless and nectarful flowers. However, there has been no attempt to optimize the investment in nectar production along with that in floral display. One of the key questions that arises is whether the floral display will evolve to be an honest indicator of nectar reward. We use a mathematical model to cooptimize the investments in nectar and floral display in order to achieve maximum reproductive success. The model assumes that pollinators rely on a relative rather than an absolute judgement of reward. A conspicuous floral display attracts naïve pollinators on the one hand and enhances pollinator learning on the other. We show that under these assumptions, plant-pollinator co-evolution leads to honest signalling, i.e. a positive correlation between display and reward.     

Pollinator parasites and the evolution of floral traits

The main selective force driving floral evolution and diversity is plant–pollinator interactions. Pollinators use floral signals and indirect cues to assess flower reward, and the ensuing flower choice has major implications for plant fitness. While many pollinator behaviors have been described, the impact of parasites on pollinator foraging decisions and plant–pollinator interactions have been largely overlooked. Growing evidence of the transmission of parasites through the shared‐use of flowers by pollinators demonstrate the importance of behavioral immunity (altered behaviors that enhance parasite resistance) to pollinator health. During foraging bouts, pollinators can protect themselves against parasites through self‐medication, disease avoidance, and grooming. Recent studies have documented immune behaviors in foraging pollinators, as well as the impacts of such behaviors on flower visitation. Because pollinator parasites can affect flower choice and pollen dispersal, they may ultimately impact flower fitness. Here, we discuss how pollinator immune behaviors and floral traits may affect the presence and transmission of pollinator parasites, as well as how pollinator parasites, through these immune behaviors, can impact plant–pollinator interactions. We further discuss how pollinator immune behaviors can impact plant fitness, and how floral traits may adapt to optimize plant fitness in response to pollinator parasites. We propose future research directions to assess the role of pollinator parasites in plant–pollinator interactions and evolution, and we propose better integration of the role of pollinator parasites into research related to pollinator optimal foraging theory, floral diversity and agricultural practices.     

The evolution of floral scent: the influence of olfactory learning by insect pollinators on the honest signalling of floral rewards

1.  The evolution of flowering plants has undoubtedly been influenced by a pollinator's ability to learn to associate floral signals with food. Here, we address the question of 'why' flowers produce scent by examining the ways in which olfactory learning by insect pollinators could influence how floral scent emission evolves in plant populations.
2.  Being provided with a floral scent signal allows pollinators to learn to be specific in their foraging habits, which could, in turn, produce a selective advantage for plants if sexual reproduction is limited by the income of compatible gametes. Learning studies with honeybees predict that pollinator-mediated selection for floral scent production should favour signals which are distinctive and exhibit low variation within species because these signals are learned faster. Social bees quickly learn to associate scent with the presence of nectar, and their ability to do this is generally faster and more reliable than their ability to learn visual cues.
3.  Pollinators rely on floral scent as a means of distinguishing honestly signalling flowers from deceptive ones. Furthermore, a pollinator's sensitivity to differences in nectar rewards can bias the way that it responds to floral scent. This mechanism may select for flowers that provide olfactory signals as an honest indicator of the presence of nectar or which select against the production of a detectable scent signal when no nectar is present.
4.  We expect that an important yet commonly overlooked function of floral scent is an improvement in short-term pollinator specificity which provides an advantage to both pollinator and plant over the use of a visual signal alone. This, in turn, impacts the evolution of plant mating systems via its influence on the species-specific patterns of floral visitation by pollinators.     

Selection on signal–reward correlation: limits and opportunities to the evolution of deceit in Turnera ulmifolia L

Because pollinators are unable to directly assess the amount of rewards offered by flowers, they rely on the information provided by advertising floral traits. Thus, having a lower intra-individual correlation between signal and reward (signal accuracy) than other plants in the population provides the opportunity to reduce investment in rewards and cheat pollinators. However, pollinators' cognitive capacities can impose a limit to the evolution of this plant cheating strategy if they can punish those plants with low signal accuracy. In this study, we examined the opportunity for cheating in the perennial weed Turnera ulmifolia L. evaluating the selective value of signal accuracy, floral display and reward production in a natural population. We found that plant reproductive success was positively related to signal accuracy and floral display, but not to nectar production. The intensity of selection on floral display was more than three times higher than on signal accuracy. The pattern of selection indicated that pollinators can select for signal accuracy provided by plants and suggests that learning abilities of pollinators can limit the evolution of deceptive strategies in T. ulmifolia.     

A two-pollinator model for the evolution of floral complexity

For a new, more complex floral form to become established in a population it must overcome the problem of frequency-dependent constancy to successfully attract pollinators. This may be achieved by complex floral forms offering absolute greater rewards than the simpler forms, or by complex flowers offering a higher probability of being rewarding because fewer pollinators are able to visit them. In this paper we examine the effect of three pollinator foraging strategies on the ratio of flights within and between floral morphs and hence on the probability of a new morph establishing in a population without offering a greater reward. We incorporate pollinator behaviour based around observations of two pollinator species systems into three models of competition for pollinators. In the first model the constancy of the pollinator of the new floral morph is a function only of the foraging strategy of the existing pollinator of the original floral morph. In the next model the constancy of the second pollinator is determined by the number of rewarding flowers of each floral morph left by the original pollinator and in the third model it is determined by the ratio of rewarding flowers of each morph left by the original pollinator. The results demonstrate that under conditions of intense competition for pollinators, new, more complex floral forms are indeed able to attract high levels of constant pollinators without offering intrinsically higher rewards. However, for this to occur constancy in one of the pollinators must be a function of the ratio of rewarding to non-rewarding flowers of both floral forms. One prediction from our results is that sympatric speciation of floral complexity based on a higher probability of reward is more likely to occur in flowers offering rewards of pollen rather than nectar. This is because the cost of visiting non-rewarding flowers is usually higher where the reward is pollen rather than nectar. We also predict that complex flowers occurring at low frequency, which offer rewards of nectar, may need intrinsically greater rewards if they are to successfully attract pollinators.     

The evolution of signal–reward correlations in bee- and hummingbird-pollinated species of Salvia

Within-individual variation in floral advertising and reward traits is a feature experienced by pollinators that visit different flowers of the same plant. Pollinators can use advertising traits to gather information about the quality and amount of rewards, leading to the evolution of signal–reward correlations. As long as plants differ in the reliability of their signals and pollinators base their foraging decisions on this information, natural selection should act on within-individual correlations between signals and rewards. Because birds and bees differ in their cognitive capabilities, and use different floral traits as signals, we tested the occurrence of adaptive divergence of the within-individual signal–reward correlations among Salvia species that are pollinated either by bees or by hummingbirds. They are expected to use different floral advertising traits: frontal traits in the case of bees and side traits in the case of hummingbirds. We confirmed this expectation as bee- and hummingbird-pollinated species differed in which specific traits are predominantly associated with nectar reward at the within-individual level. Our findings highlight the adaptive value of within-individual variation and covariation patterns, commonly disregarded as ‘environmental noise’, and are consistent with the hypothesis that pollinator-mediated selection affects the correlation pattern among floral traits.     

Mauritian coloured nectar no longer a mystery: a visual signal for lizard pollinators

Most floral nectars are clear as water, and the enigmatic coloured nectar in three endemic plant species in Mauritius has puzzled scientists studying it. One hypothesis about the possible ecological function of coloured nectar is that it serves as a visual signal for pollinators. Recent studies have shown that at least two of the three Mauritian plant species with coloured nectar are visited and pollinated by endemic Phelsuma geckos. We here provide experimental evidence for the visual signal hypothesis by showing that Phelsuma ornata geckos prefer coloured over clear nectar in artificial flowers. In flowering plants, coloured nectar could additionally function as an honest signal that allows pollinators to assert the presence and judge the size of a reward prior to flower visitation, and to adjust their behaviour accordingly, leading to increased pollinator efficiency. Our study provides a first step in understanding this rare and intriguing floral trait.     

贠建全:广东荷包岛维管束植物名录

以分布于秦岭的金花忍冬（Lonicera chrysantha Turcz.）、忍冬（L.japonica Thunb.）、葱皮忍冬（L.ferdinandii Franch.）和金银忍冬（L.maackii（Rupr.）Maxim.）为对象,通过定位观察、人工授粉实验、人为设置实验斑块的方法对忍冬属4种植物的开花生物学特性、繁育系统、花色变化现象、传粉过程进行了研究。结果表明,4种植物的单花花期、花部特征存在差异。人工授粉实验显示,4种植物均存在一定的花粉限制,自交不亲和。除葱皮忍冬外,其余3种植物随着花色由白变黄,花粉和花蜜报酬减少、雌雄生殖能力逐渐降低;葱皮忍冬花变色后花蜜量变化不显著,且仍保留较强的雌性生殖能力。变色花的保留被认为是植物的一种生殖策略,通过增大植物的花展示来扩大自身的吸引力,以吸引更多远距传粉者访花。人为控制白、黄花不同数量比的实验结果表明,大多数传粉者偏向访问白花（变色前的花）,且白花提供的报酬量和黄花（变色后的花）数量显著影响传粉者的访花频率,即当花蜜量减少或黄花数量增多时,传粉者访花频率随之降低。因此,我们认为忍冬属4种植物的花色变化可能除了增大植物对远距传粉者的吸引力外,对近距传粉者的访花行为也可能具有一定的影响。当传粉者接近植株时,变色后的花可能暗示其花蜜（花粉）报酬已经发生变化,并驱使昆虫离开并飞向同株或异株植物新开放的报酬丰富的白花,这既有利于提高传粉者的觅食效率,又能降低植物同株异花授粉的几率,对忍冬属植物及传粉者都具有重要意义,是植物长期与授粉昆虫相互适应的反映。     

ECOLOGICAL COSTS OF PLANT RESISTANCE TO HERBIVORES IN THE CURRENCY OF POLLINATION

In this paper, we examine how ecological costs of resistance might be manifested through plant relationships with pollinators. If defensive compounds are incorporated into floral structures or if they are sufficiently costly that fewer rewards are offered to pollinators, pollinators may discriminate against more defended plants. Here we consider whether directional selection for increased resistance to herbivores could be constrained by opposing selection through pollinator discrimination against more defended plants. We used artificial selection to create two populations of Brassica rapa plants that had high and low myrosinase concentrations and, consequently, high and low resistance to flea beetle herbivores. We measured changes in floral characters of plants in both damaged and undamaged states from these populations with different resistances to flea beetle attack. We also measured pollinator visitation to plants, including numbers of pollinators and measures of visit quality (numbers of flowers visited and time spent per flower). Damage from herbivores resulted in reduced petal size, as did selection for high resistance to herbivores later in the plant lifetime. In addition, floral display (number of open flowers) was also altered by an interaction between these two effects. Changes in floral traits translated into overall greater use of low-resistance, undamaged plants based on total amount of time pollinators spent foraging on plants. Total numbers of pollinators attracted to plants did not differ among treatments; however, pollinators spent significantly more time per flower on plants from the low-resistance population and tended to visit more flowers on these plants as well. Previous work by other investigators on the same pollinator taxa has shown that longer visit times are associated with greater male and female plant fitness. Because initial numbers of pollinators did not differ between selection regimes, palatability and/or amount of rewards offered by high- and low-resistance populations are likely to be responsible for these patterns. During periods of pollinator limitation, less defended plants may have a selective advantage and pollinator preferences may mediate directional selection imposed by herbivores. In addition, if pollinator preferences limit seed set in highly defended plants, then lower seed set previously attributed to allocation costs of defense may also reflect greater pollinator limitation in these plants relative to less defended plants.     

Floral antagonists counteract pollinator‐mediated selection on attractiveness traits in the hummingbird‐pollinated Collaea cipoensis (Fabaceae)

Pollinator‐mediated selection toward larger and abundant flowers is common in naturally pollen‐limited populations. However, floral antagonists may counteract this effect, maintaining smaller‐ and few‐flowered individuals within populations. We quantified pollinator and antagonist visit rates and determined a multiplicative female fitness component from attacked and non‐attacked flowers of the Brazilian hummingbird‐pollinated shrub Collaea cipoensis to determine the selective effects of pollinators and floral antagonists on flower size and number. We predicted that floral antagonists reduce the female fitness component and thus exert negative selective pressures on flower size and number, counteracting the positive effects of pollinators. Pollinators, mainly hummingbirds, comprised 4% of total floral visitation, whereas antagonist ants and bees accounted for 90% of visitation. Nectar‐robbers involved about 99% of floral antagonist visit rates, whereas florivores comprised the remaining 1%. Larger and abundant flowers increased both pollinator and antagonist visit rates and the female fitness component significantly decreased in flowers attacked by nectar‐robbers and florivores in comparison to non‐attacked flowers. We detected that pollinators favored larger‐ and many‐flowered individuals, whereas floral antagonists exerted negative selection on flower size and number. This study confirms that floral antagonists reduce female plant fitness and this pattern directly exerts negative selective pressures on flower size and number, counteracting pollinator‐mediated selection on floral attractiveness traits.     

Are pollinators the agents of selection on flower colour and size in irises?

Plant–pollinator interactions are believed to play a major role in the evolution of floral traits. Flower colour and flower size are important for attracting pollinators, directly influencing reproduction, and thus expected to be under pollinator‐mediated selection. Pollinator‐mediated selection is also proposed to play a role in maintaining flower colour polymorphism within populations. However, pigment concentrations, and thus flower colour, are also under selective pressures independent of pollinators. We quantified phenotypic pollinator‐mediated selection on flower colour and size in two colour polymorphic Iris species. Using female fitness, we estimated phenotypic selection on flower colour and size, and tested for pollinator‐mediated selection by comparing selection gradients between flowers open to natural pollination and supplementary pollinated flowers. In both species, we found evidence for pollen limitation, which set the base for pollinator‐mediated selection. In the colour dimorphic Iris lutescens, while pigment concentration and flower size were found to be under selection, this was independent of pollinators. For the polymorphic Iris pumila, pigment concentration is under selective pressure by pollinators, but only for one colour morph. Our results suggest that pollinators are not the main agents of selection on floral traits in these irises, as opposed to the accepted paradigm on floral evolution. This study provides an opposing example to the largely‐accepted theory that pollinators are the major agent of selection on floral traits.     

Floral colour change in Pedicularis monbeigiana (Orobanchaceae)

We examined the effects of the retention of colour-changed flowers on long- and short-distance attractiveness of bumblebees and the likelihood of successive flower visits by bumblebees in Pedicularis monbeigiana. The lower lip changed colour with age from white to purple. Hand geitonogamous pollination significantly reduced seed production. No pollen limitation occurred in this species. Purple-phase flowers contributed minimally to pollinator attractiveness at long distance. The combination of less reproductive flowers with a lower amount of reward and floral colour change enabled plants to direct pollinators to reproductive, highly rewarding white flowers at close range. A high percentage of purple-phase flowers in an inflorescence was associated with a marked reduction in the frequency of successive flower visits to individual plants. We suggest floral colour change in P. monbeigiana may serve as a mechanism for enhancing inter-individual pollen transfer and reducing intra-individual pollen transfer.     

Hummingbird responses to gender-biased nectar production: are nectar biases maintained by natural or sexual selection?

Pollinators mediate the evolution of secondary floral traits through both natural and sexual selection. Gender-biased nectar, for example, could be maintained by one or both, depending on the interactions between plants and pollinators. Here, I investigate pollinator responses to gender-biased nectar using the dichogamous herb Chrysothemis friedrichsthaliana (Gesneriaceae) which produces more nectar during the male floral phase. Previous research showed that the hummingbird pollinator Phaethornis striigularis visited male-phase flowers more often than female-phase flowers, and multiple visits benefited male more than female fecundity. If sexual selection maintains male-biased rewards, hummingbirds should prefer more-rewarding flowers independent of floral gender. If, however, differential rewards are partially maintained through natural selection, hummingbirds should respond to asymmetry with visits that reduce geitonogamy, i.e. selfing and pollen discounting. In plants with male biases, these visit types include single-flower visits and movements from low to high rewards. To test these predictions, I manipulated nectar asymmetry between pairs of real or artificial flowers on plants and recorded foraging behaviour. I also assessed maternal costs of selfing using hand pollinations. For plants with real flowers, hummingbirds preferred more-rewarding flowers and male-phase morphology, the latter possibly owing to previous experience. At artificial arrays, hummingbirds responded to extreme reward asymmetry with increased single-flower visits; however, they moved from high to low rewards more often than low to high. Finally, selfed flowers did not produce inferior seeds. In summary, sexual selection, more so than geitonogamy avoidance, maintains nectar biases in C. friedrichsthaliana, in one of the clearest examples of sexual selection in plants, to date.     

Optimal foraging when predation risk increases with patch resources: an analysis of pollinators and ambush predators

Pollinators and their predators share innate and learned preferences for high quality flowers. Consequently, pollinators are more likely to encounter predators when visiting the most rewarding flowers. I present a model of how different pollinator species can maximize lifetime resource gains depending on the density and distribution of predators, as well as their vulnerability to capture by predators. For pollinator species that are difficult for predators to capture, the optimal strategy is to visit the most rewarding flowers as long as predator density is low. At higher predator densities and for pollinators that are more vulnerable to predator capture, the lifetime resource gain from the most rewarding flowers declines and the optimal strategy depends on the predator distribution. In some cases, a wide range of floral rewards provides near‐maximum lifetime resource gains, which may favor generalization if searching for flowers is costly. In other cases, a low flower reward level provides the maximum lifetime resource gain and so pollinators should specialize on less rewarding flowers. Thus, the model suggests that predators can have qualitatively different top‐down effects on plant reproductive success depending on the pollinator species, the density of predators, and the distribution of predators across flower reward levels.     

THE EVOLUTION OF POLLINATOR–PLANT INTERACTION TYPES IN THE ARACEAE

Most plant–pollinator interactions are mutualistic, involving rewards provided by flowers or inflorescences to pollinators. Antagonistic plant–pollinator interactions, in which flowers offer no rewards, are rare and concentrated in a few families including Araceae. In the latter, they involve trapping of pollinators, which are released loaded with pollen but unrewarded. To understand the evolution of such systems, we compiled data on the pollinators and types of interactions, and coded 21 characters, including interaction type, pollinator order, and 19 floral traits. A phylogenetic framework comes from a matrix of plastid and new nuclear DNA sequences for 135 species from 119 genera (5342 nucleotides). The ancestral pollination interaction in Araceae was reconstructed as probably rewarding albeit with low confidence because information is available for only 56 of the 120–130 genera. Bayesian stochastic trait mapping showed that spadix zonation, presence of an appendix, and flower sexuality were correlated with pollination interaction type. In the Araceae, having unisexual flowers appears to have provided the morphological precondition for the evolution of traps. Compared with the frequency of shifts between deceptive and rewarding pollination systems in orchids, our results indicate less lability in the Araceae, probably because of morphologically and sexually more specialized inflorescences.     

Variation in context‐dependent foraging behavior across pollinators

Pollinator foraging behavior has direct consequences for plant reproduction and has been implicated in driving floral trait evolution. Exploring the degree to which pollinators exhibit flexibility in foraging behavior will add to a mechanistic understanding of how pollinators can impose selection on plant traits. Although plants have evolved suites of floral traits to attract pollinators, flower color is a particularly important aspect of the floral display. Some pollinators show strong innate color preference, but many pollinators display flexibility in preference due to learning associations between rewards and color, or due to variable perception of color in different environments or plant communities. This study examines the flexibility in flower color preference of two groups of native butterfly pollinators under natural field conditions. We find that pipevine swallowtails (Battus philenor) and skippers (family Hesperiidae), the predominate pollinators of the two native Texas Phlox species, Phlox cuspidata and Phlox drummondii, display distinct patterns of color preferences across different contexts. Pipevine swallowtails exhibit highly flexible color preferences and likely utilize other floral traits to make foraging decisions. In contrast, skippers have consistent color preferences and likely use flower color as a primary cue for foraging. As a result of this variation in color preference flexibility, the two pollinator groups impose concordant selection on flower color in some contexts but discordant selection in other contexts. This variability could have profound implications for how flower traits respond to pollinator‐mediated selection. Our findings suggest that studying dynamics of behavior in natural field conditions is important for understanding plant–pollinator interactions.     

Mechanisms and evolution of deceptive pollination in orchids

The orchid family is renowned for its enormous diversity of pollination mechanisms and unusually high occurrence of non-rewarding flowers compared to other plant families. The mechanisms of deception in orchids include generalized food deception, food-deceptive floral mimicry, brood-site imitation, shelter imitation, pseudoantagonism, rendezvous attraction and sexual deception. Generalized food deception is the most common mechanism (reported in 38 genera) followed by sexual deception (18 genera). Floral deception in orchids has been intensively studied since Darwin, but the evolution of non-rewarding flowers still presents a major puzzle for evolutionary biology. The two principal hypotheses as to how deception could increase fitness in plants are (i) reallocation of resources associated with reward production to flowering and seed production, and (ii) higher levels of cross-pollination due to pollinators visiting fewer flowers on non-rewarding plants, resulting in more outcrossed progeny and more efficient pollen export. Biologists have also tried to explain why deception is overrepresented in the orchid family. These explanations include: (i) efficient removal and deposition of pollinaria from orchid flowers in a single pollinator visit, thus obviating the need for rewards to entice multiple visits from pollinators; (ii) efficient transport of orchid pollen, thus requiring less reward-induced pollinator constancy; (iii) low-density populations in many orchids, thus limiting the learning of associations of floral phenotypes and rewards by pollinators; (iv) packaging of pollen in pollinaria with limited carry-over from flower to flower, thus increasing the risks of geitonogamous self-pollination when pollinators visit many flowers on rewarding plants. All of these general and orchid-specific hypotheses are difficult to reconcile with the well-established pattern for rewardlessness to result in low pollinator visitation rates and consequently low levels of fruit production. Arguments that deception evolves because rewards are costly are particularly problematic in that small amounts of nectar are unlikely to have a significant effect on the energy budget of orchids, and because reproduction in orchids is often severely pollen-, rather than resource-limited. Several recent experimental studies have shown that deception promotes cross-pollination, but it remains unknown whether actual outcrossing rates are generally higher in deceptive orchids. Our review of the literature shows that there is currently no evidence that deceptive orchids carry higher levels of genetic load (an indirect measure of outcrossing rate) than their rewarding counterparts. Cross-pollination does, however, result in dramatic increases in seed quality in almost all orchids and has the potential to increase pollen export (by reducing pollen discounting). We suggest that floral deception is particularly beneficial, because of its promotion of outcrossing, when pollinators are abundant, but that when pollinators are consistently rare, selection may favour a nectar reward or a shift to autopollination. Given that nectar-rewardlessness is likely to have been the ancestral condition in orchids and yet is evolutionarily labile, more attention will need to be given to explanations as to why deception constitutes an 'evolutionarily stable strategy'.     

Pollinator‐mediated selection on floral size and tube color in Linum pubescens: Can differential behavior and preference in different times of the day maintain dimorphism?

Diversity of flower traits is often proposed as the outcome of selection exerted by pollinators. Positive directional pollinator‐mediated selection on floral size has been widely shown to reduce phenotypic variance. However, the underlying mechanism of maintaining within‐population floral color polymorphism is poorly understood. Divergent selection, mediated by different pollinators or by both mutualists and antagonists, may create and maintain such polymorphism, but it has rarely been shown to result from differential behavior of one pollinator. We tested whether different behaviors of the same pollinators in morning and evening are associated with dimorphic floral trait in Linum pubescens, a Mediterranean annual plant that exhibits variable within‐population frequencies of dark‐ and light‐colored flower tubes. Usia bicolor bee‐flies, the major pollinators of L. pubescens, are mostly feeding in the flower in the morning, while in the evening they are mostly visiting the flowers for mating. In 2 years of studying L. pubescens in a single large population in the Carmel, Israel, we found in one year that dark‐centered flowers received significantly higher fraction of visits in the morning. Fitness was positively affected by number of visits, but no fitness differences were found between tube‐color morphs, suggesting that both morphs have similar pollination success. Using mediation analysis, we found that flower size was under positive directional pollinator‐mediated selection in both years, but pollinator behavior did not explain entirely this selection, which was possibly mediated also by other agents, such as florivores or a‐biotic stresses. While most pollinator‐mediated selection studies show that flower size signals food reward, in L. pubescens, it may also signal for mating place, which may drive positive selection. While flower size found to be under pollinator‐mediated selection in L. pubescens, differential behavior of the pollinators in morning and evening did not seem to explain flower color polymorphism.