蝴蝶、熊蜂和食蚜蝇都是 Knautia arvensis(毛果芸香科)的有效传粉者,Knautia arvensis(毛果芸香科)是一种具有复花序的通性植物物种。

IF 1.7 3区 农林科学 Q2 ENTOMOLOGY
Jeff Ollerton, Emma Coulthard, Sam Tarrant, James Woolford, Leonardo Ré Jorge, André Rodrigo Rech
{"title":"蝴蝶、熊蜂和食蚜蝇都是 Knautia arvensis(毛果芸香科)的有效传粉者,Knautia arvensis(毛果芸香科)是一种具有复花序的通性植物物种。","authors":"Jeff Ollerton, Emma Coulthard, Sam Tarrant, James Woolford, Leonardo Ré Jorge, André Rodrigo Rech","doi":"10.1111/jen.13345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Plant‐pollinator interactions exist along a continuum from complete specialisation to highly generalised, that may vary in time and space. A long‐held assumption is that large bees are usually the most effective pollinators of generalist plants. We tested this by studying the relative importance of different groups of pollinators of <jats:italic>Knautia arvensis</jats:italic> (L.) Coult. (Caprifoliaceae: Dipsacoideae). This plant is suitable for such a study because it attracts a diversity of flower visitors, belonging to different functional groups. We asked whether all functional groups of pollinators are equally effective, or if one group is most effective, which has been documented in other species with apparently generalised pollination systems. We studied two subpopulations of <jats:italic>K. arvensis</jats:italic>, one at low and one at high density in Northampton, UK. To assess pollinator importance we exposed unvisited inflorescences to single visits by different groups of pollinators (butterflies, bumblebees, hoverflies and others) and assessed the proportion of pollinated stigmas. We then multiplied the effectiveness of each pollinator group with their proportional visitation frequency in five different years. For each group we also compared time spent on flowers and flight distance between visits. The relative importance of each pollinator group varied between years, as did their flight distances between flower visits. Butterflies were the best pollinators on a per visit basis (in terms of the proportion of stigmas pollinated) and flew further after visiting an inflorescence. Different measures and proxies of pollinator effectiveness varied between taxa, subpopulations, and years, and no one group of pollinators was consistently more effective than the others. Our results demonstrate the adaptive value of generalised pollination strategies when variation in relative abundance of different types of pollinators is considered. Such strategies may have buffered the ability of plants to reproduce during past periods of environmental change and may do so in the future.","PeriodicalId":14987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Entomology","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Butterflies, bumblebees and hoverflies are equally effective pollinators of Knautia arvensis (Caprifoliaceae), a generalist plant species with compound inflorescences\",\"authors\":\"Jeff Ollerton, Emma Coulthard, Sam Tarrant, James Woolford, Leonardo Ré Jorge, André Rodrigo Rech\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jen.13345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Plant‐pollinator interactions exist along a continuum from complete specialisation to highly generalised, that may vary in time and space. A long‐held assumption is that large bees are usually the most effective pollinators of generalist plants. We tested this by studying the relative importance of different groups of pollinators of <jats:italic>Knautia arvensis</jats:italic> (L.) Coult. (Caprifoliaceae: Dipsacoideae). This plant is suitable for such a study because it attracts a diversity of flower visitors, belonging to different functional groups. We asked whether all functional groups of pollinators are equally effective, or if one group is most effective, which has been documented in other species with apparently generalised pollination systems. We studied two subpopulations of <jats:italic>K. arvensis</jats:italic>, one at low and one at high density in Northampton, UK. To assess pollinator importance we exposed unvisited inflorescences to single visits by different groups of pollinators (butterflies, bumblebees, hoverflies and others) and assessed the proportion of pollinated stigmas. We then multiplied the effectiveness of each pollinator group with their proportional visitation frequency in five different years. For each group we also compared time spent on flowers and flight distance between visits. The relative importance of each pollinator group varied between years, as did their flight distances between flower visits. Butterflies were the best pollinators on a per visit basis (in terms of the proportion of stigmas pollinated) and flew further after visiting an inflorescence. Different measures and proxies of pollinator effectiveness varied between taxa, subpopulations, and years, and no one group of pollinators was consistently more effective than the others. Our results demonstrate the adaptive value of generalised pollination strategies when variation in relative abundance of different types of pollinators is considered. Such strategies may have buffered the ability of plants to reproduce during past periods of environmental change and may do so in the future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14987,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Entomology\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Entomology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.13345\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENTOMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Entomology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.13345","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

植物与授粉者之间的相互作用存在着一个从完全专业化到高度普遍化的连续统一体,可能在时间和空间上有所不同。一个长期存在的假设是,大型蜜蜂通常是通性植物最有效的授粉者。我们通过研究 Knautia arvensis (L.) Coult.(Caprifoliaceae: Dipsacoideae)的不同传粉媒介群的相对重要性进行了测试。这种植物适合进行此类研究,因为它能吸引属于不同功能群的多种访花者。我们想知道是否所有功能群的授粉者都同样有效,还是某一功能群最有效,这在其他具有明显普遍授粉系统的物种中已有记载。我们研究了英国北安普顿的两个 K. arvensis 亚群,一个密度低,一个密度高。为了评估授粉者的重要性,我们让不同的授粉者群体(蝴蝶、熊蜂、食蚜蝇等)对未经访问的花序进行单次访问,并评估授粉柱头的比例。然后,我们将每个传粉昆虫群的效率与其在五个不同年份的访问频率比例相乘。我们还比较了每种授粉昆虫在花朵上所花费的时间以及两次访问之间的飞行距离。每种授粉昆虫在不同年份的相对重要性各不相同,它们在花朵上的飞行距离也各不相同。蝴蝶是每次访花(就柱头授粉比例而言)的最佳授粉者,并且在访花后飞得更远。不同类群、亚种群和年份的授粉者有效性的不同衡量标准和代用指标各不相同,没有一组授粉者始终比其他授粉者更有效。当考虑到不同类型授粉者相对丰度的变化时,我们的研究结果证明了通用授粉策略的适应价值。在过去的环境变化时期,这种策略可能缓冲了植物的繁殖能力,在未来也可能如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Butterflies, bumblebees and hoverflies are equally effective pollinators of Knautia arvensis (Caprifoliaceae), a generalist plant species with compound inflorescences
Plant‐pollinator interactions exist along a continuum from complete specialisation to highly generalised, that may vary in time and space. A long‐held assumption is that large bees are usually the most effective pollinators of generalist plants. We tested this by studying the relative importance of different groups of pollinators of Knautia arvensis (L.) Coult. (Caprifoliaceae: Dipsacoideae). This plant is suitable for such a study because it attracts a diversity of flower visitors, belonging to different functional groups. We asked whether all functional groups of pollinators are equally effective, or if one group is most effective, which has been documented in other species with apparently generalised pollination systems. We studied two subpopulations of K. arvensis, one at low and one at high density in Northampton, UK. To assess pollinator importance we exposed unvisited inflorescences to single visits by different groups of pollinators (butterflies, bumblebees, hoverflies and others) and assessed the proportion of pollinated stigmas. We then multiplied the effectiveness of each pollinator group with their proportional visitation frequency in five different years. For each group we also compared time spent on flowers and flight distance between visits. The relative importance of each pollinator group varied between years, as did their flight distances between flower visits. Butterflies were the best pollinators on a per visit basis (in terms of the proportion of stigmas pollinated) and flew further after visiting an inflorescence. Different measures and proxies of pollinator effectiveness varied between taxa, subpopulations, and years, and no one group of pollinators was consistently more effective than the others. Our results demonstrate the adaptive value of generalised pollination strategies when variation in relative abundance of different types of pollinators is considered. Such strategies may have buffered the ability of plants to reproduce during past periods of environmental change and may do so in the future.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Entomology publishes original articles on current research in applied entomology, including mites and spiders in terrestrial ecosystems. Submit your next manuscript for rapid publication: the average time is currently 6 months from submission to publication. With Journal of Applied Entomology''s dynamic article-by-article publication process, Early View, fully peer-reviewed and type-set articles are published online as soon as they complete, without waiting for full issue compilation.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信