首页> 外文期刊>Oecologia >Are nectar-robbers mutualists or antagonists?
【24h】

Are nectar-robbers mutualists or antagonists?

机译:花蜜劫匪是互助主义者还是反对者?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

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.
机译:作为植物授粉媒介共生的“探索者”,花蜜劫匪在不提供授粉服务的情况下消除了奖励(花蜜)。尽管人们可能认为花蜜抢劫对植物造成了昂贵的损失,但它反而可能通过间接增加花粉的扩散而使植物受益。我调查了花蜜蜜蜂(Xylocopa californica)对花粉和传粉者到访沙漠柳(Chilopsis linearis)的授粉行为的直接影响,以及掠夺对植物繁殖成功的间接影响。花蜜强盗还原花蜜;未抢花和抢花的花蜜含量相同,而带有花蜜的抢花的花蜜体积较小。在花粉沉积方面无效的传粉者蜜蜂蜜蜂(Apis mellifera)避免了抢花。相反,有效的传粉者熊蜂(Bombus sonorus)并没有避免抢花。大黄蜂倾向于花更少的时间去抢花,但是它们花在花朵上的时间却与花粉的沉积无关。我使用粉末模仿花粉,发现在某些日子,粉末被分散到离抢劫的花朵更远或更远的花朵上,这表明抢劫有时可以通过增加雄性繁殖成功而使植物受益。粉末运动表明,抢劫对男性生殖成功的影响范围从昂贵到有益。每天清晨标记的花朵的结果取决于抢劫的发生率和有效传粉媒介的数量,而不取决于抢劫发生率或无效蜜蜂的数量在树木之间的空间变异性。与散粉不同,通过结实和花粉管数量增长来衡量的雌性繁殖成功不受抢劫的影响。因此,强盗并没有直接通过破坏花朵或通过减少授粉媒介的花粉沉积而间接降低了植物的雌性繁殖成功率。总体而言,这项研究表明,花蜜抢劫者对植物的代价并不高,有时甚至使植物受益。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号