Exclusion of bird pollinators impacts mating system and reduces offspring fitness in a pollination-generalist tree.

IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 PLANT SCIENCES
Louis M Ashton, Dylan Korczynskyj, Ryan D Phillips, Stanislaw Wawrzyczek, Eddie J van Etten, Siegfried L Krauss
{"title":"Exclusion of bird pollinators impacts mating system and reduces offspring fitness in a pollination-generalist tree.","authors":"Louis M Ashton, Dylan Korczynskyj, Ryan D Phillips, Stanislaw Wawrzyczek, Eddie J van Etten, Siegfried L Krauss","doi":"10.1093/aob/mcaf168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>In comparison to pollinating insects and non-flying mammals (NFMs), nectarivorous birds might display behaviours leading to greater pollen carryover. Therefore, plants pollinated by birds might display higher levels of paternal diversity and outcrossing than those pollinated by insects and NFMs, with associated fitness benefits for seeds and seedlings. Here, we test these predictions using a plant where birds, insects and NFMs are all frequent visitors to flowers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An experiment manipulating access to flowers of Banksia menziesii (Proteaceae) was conducted. Treatments applied to whole plants were: (1) open to all pollinators; (2) insect access, with birds and NFMs excluded; (3) NFM access, with insects and birds excluded; and (4) complete pollinator exclusion. Reproductive output was quantified in terms of fruit and seed production. The genetic consequences for offspring were tested using microsatellite markers to genotype individuals and quantify the mating system, and through field trials to quantify seedling vigour.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>When birds were excluded from flowers, maternal fitness was reduced. In comparison to open pollinated flowers, fruit set was reduced by 76 % when only NFMs could access flowers. When only insects (primarily introduced honeybees) could access flowers, the number of viable seeds per fruit was reduced by 20 % because the proportion of aborted seeds doubled, in comparison to pollination that included birds. For seedlings, heterozygosity was reduced by 22 %, outcrossing rates by 30 % and paternal diversity by 15 %, when birds were excluded. Seedling mortality was strongly associated with inbreeding, and selfing largely occurred only when birds were excluded. All parameters were lowest when only NFMs had access to flowers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although honeybees were effective pollinators of B. menziesii owing to their abundance, birds were inferred to be the most effective, with their exclusion resulting in a reduction of fecundity and offspring vigour. These negative effects were largely a consequence of selection against the products of self-pollination, which was associated with pollination by insects or NFMs. Our findings highlight how a genetic component of pollination that increases offspring fitness could favour the evolution of bird pollination.</p>","PeriodicalId":8023,"journal":{"name":"Annals of botany","volume":" ","pages":"887-902"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12464952/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of botany","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcaf168","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: In comparison to pollinating insects and non-flying mammals (NFMs), nectarivorous birds might display behaviours leading to greater pollen carryover. Therefore, plants pollinated by birds might display higher levels of paternal diversity and outcrossing than those pollinated by insects and NFMs, with associated fitness benefits for seeds and seedlings. Here, we test these predictions using a plant where birds, insects and NFMs are all frequent visitors to flowers.

Methods: An experiment manipulating access to flowers of Banksia menziesii (Proteaceae) was conducted. Treatments applied to whole plants were: (1) open to all pollinators; (2) insect access, with birds and NFMs excluded; (3) NFM access, with insects and birds excluded; and (4) complete pollinator exclusion. Reproductive output was quantified in terms of fruit and seed production. The genetic consequences for offspring were tested using microsatellite markers to genotype individuals and quantify the mating system, and through field trials to quantify seedling vigour.

Key results: When birds were excluded from flowers, maternal fitness was reduced. In comparison to open pollinated flowers, fruit set was reduced by 76 % when only NFMs could access flowers. When only insects (primarily introduced honeybees) could access flowers, the number of viable seeds per fruit was reduced by 20 % because the proportion of aborted seeds doubled, in comparison to pollination that included birds. For seedlings, heterozygosity was reduced by 22 %, outcrossing rates by 30 % and paternal diversity by 15 %, when birds were excluded. Seedling mortality was strongly associated with inbreeding, and selfing largely occurred only when birds were excluded. All parameters were lowest when only NFMs had access to flowers.

Conclusions: Although honeybees were effective pollinators of B. menziesii owing to their abundance, birds were inferred to be the most effective, with their exclusion resulting in a reduction of fecundity and offspring vigour. These negative effects were largely a consequence of selection against the products of self-pollination, which was associated with pollination by insects or NFMs. Our findings highlight how a genetic component of pollination that increases offspring fitness could favour the evolution of bird pollination.

排除鸟类传粉者会影响交配系统,降低传粉通才树的后代适合度。
背景与目的:与授粉昆虫和非飞行哺乳动物(NFM)相比,食蜜鸟可能表现出导致更多花粉携带的行为。因此,鸟类传粉的植物可能比昆虫和NFM传粉的植物表现出更高水平的父系多样性和异交,这对种子和幼苗具有相关的适应性益处。在这里,我们用一种植物来测试这些预测,在这种植物中,鸟类、昆虫和NFM都是花的常客。方法:对门氏班克(变形科)花进行取用实验。对整株植物的处理:(i)对所有传粉媒介开放;(ii)昆虫通道、鸟类和NFM除外;(iii) NFM准入,排除昆虫和鸟类;(iv)完全排除传粉者。以果实和种子产量来量化繁殖产量。利用微卫星标记对个体进行基因分型并对交配系统进行量化,并通过田间试验对幼苗活力进行量化。关键结果:当鸟类被排除在花朵之外时,母体的适合度降低。与开放授粉的花相比,只有NFM可以接触花时,坐果量减少了76%。当只有昆虫(主要是引进的蜜蜂)可以接触到花朵时,每个果实的存活种子数量减少了20%,因为与包括鸟类的授粉相比,流产种子的比例增加了一倍。对幼苗而言,当排除鸟类时,杂合度降低22%,异交率降低30%,父系多样性降低15%。幼苗死亡率与近亲繁殖密切相关,而自交主要发生在排除鸟类的情况下。当只有NFM接触到花时,所有参数都最低。结论:虽然蜜蜂因其数量多而成为门齐螨的有效传粉者,但鸟类被推断为最有效的传粉者,它们的排除导致繁殖力和后代活力的降低。这些负面影响在很大程度上是对自花授粉产物的选择的结果,这与昆虫或nfm授粉有关。我们的发现强调了传粉的遗传成分如何增加后代的适应性,从而有利于鸟类传粉的进化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of botany
Annals of botany 生物-植物科学
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
138
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Annals of Botany is an international plant science journal publishing novel and rigorous research in all areas of plant science. It is published monthly in both electronic and printed forms with at least two extra issues each year that focus on a particular theme in plant biology. The Journal is managed by the Annals of Botany Company, a not-for-profit educational charity established to promote plant science worldwide. The Journal publishes original research papers, invited and submitted review articles, ''Research in Context'' expanding on original work, ''Botanical Briefings'' as short overviews of important topics, and ''Viewpoints'' giving opinions. All papers in each issue are summarized briefly in Content Snapshots , there are topical news items in the Plant Cuttings section and Book Reviews . A rigorous review process ensures that readers are exposed to genuine and novel advances across a wide spectrum of botanical knowledge. All papers aim to advance knowledge and make a difference to our understanding of plant science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信