Pollinarium morphology and floral rewards in Brazilian Maxillariinae (Orchidaceae)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is strong support for the monophyly of the orchid subtribe Maxillariinae s.l., yet generic boundaries within it are unsatisfactory and need re-evaluation. In an effort to assemble sets of morphological characters to distinguish major clades within this subtribe, the pollinarium morphology and floral rewards of representative Brazilian species of this subtribe were studied. METHODS: The study was based on fresh material from 60 species and seven genera obtained from cultivated specimens. Variation of pollinarium structure and floral rewards was assessed using a stereomicroscope and by SEM analysis. KEY RESULTS: Four morphological types of pollinaria are described. Type 1 appears to be the most widespread and is characterized by a well-developed tegula. Type 2 lacks a stipe and the pollinia are attached directly to the viscidium. Type 3 also lacks a stipe, and the viscidium is rigid and dark. In Type 4, the stipe consists of the whole median rostelar portion and, so far, is known only from Maxillaria uncata. Nectar, trichomes, wax-like and resin-like secretions are described as flower rewards for different groups of species within the genus Maxillaria. Data on the biomechanics and pollination biology are also discussed and illustrated. In Maxillariinae flowers with arcuate viscidia, the pollinaria are deposited on the scuttellum of their Hymenopteran pollinators. In contrast, some flowers with rounded to rectangular, pad-like viscidia fix their pollinaria on the face of their pollinators. CONCLUSIONS: Pollinarium morphology and floral features related to pollination in Brazilian Maxillariinae are more diverse than previously suggested. It is hoped that the data presented herein, together with other data sources such as vegetative traits and molecular tools, will be helpful in redefining and diagnosing clades within the subtribe Maxillariinae.     

Labellar micromorphology of Bifrenariinae Dressler (Orchidaceae)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The two closely related subtribes Bifrenariinae Dressler and Maxillariinae Benth. are easily distinguished on morphological grounds. Recently, however, molecular techniques have supported the inclusion of Bifrenariinae within a more broadly defined Maxillariinae. The present paper describes the diverse labellar micromorphology found amongst representatives of Bifrenariinae (Bifrenaria Lindl., Rudolfiella Hoehne, Teuscheria Garay and Xylobium Lindl.) and compares it with that found in Maxillaria Pabst & Dungs and Mormolyca Fenzl (Maxillariinae). METHODS: The labella of 35 specimens representing 22 species of Bifrenariinae were examined by means of light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy and their micromorphology compared with that of Maxillaria sensu stricto and Mormolyca spp. The labellar epidermis of representatives of Bifrenaria, Xylobium and Mormolyca was tested for protein, starch and lipids in order to ascertain whether this tissue is involved in the rewarding of pollinators. KEY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The labella of Bifrenaria spp. and Mormolyca spp. are densely pubescent but those of Xylobium, Teuscheria and Rudolfiella are generally papillose. However, whereas the trichomes of Bifrenaria and Mormolyca are unicellular, those found in the other three genera are multicellular. Hitherto, no unicellular trichomes have been described for Maxillaria, although the labella of a number of species secrete a viscid substance or bear moniliform, pseudopollen-producing hairs. Moniliform hairs and secretory material also occur in certain species of Xylobium and Teuscheria and these genera, together with Maxillaria, are thought to be pollinated by stingless bees (Meliponini). Differences in the labellar micromorphology of Bifrenaria and Mormolyca are perhaps related to Euglossine- and/ or bumble bee-mediated pollination and pseudocopulation, respectively. Although Xylobium and Teuscheria share a number of labellar features with Maxillaria sensu stricto, this does not necessarily reflect taxonomic relationships but may be indicative of convergence in response to similar pollinator pressures.