Am. J. Bot. Join BSA Today!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (18)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smithson, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Smithson, A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Smithson, A.
(American Journal of Botany. 2002;89:1579-1587.)
© 2002 Botanical Society of America, Inc.


Reproductive Biology

The consequences of rewardlessness in orchids: reward-supplementation experiments with Anacamptis morio (Orchidaceae)1

Ann Smithson2

School of Biological Sciences, University of Exeter, Hatherly Laboratories, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter EX4 4PS UK

Pollinators are expected to respond to low reward availability in an inflorescence by visiting fewer flowers before departure, thus potentially causing reduced visitation, but also reduced geitonogamous selfing. I tested this hypothesis using Anacamptis morio, an orchid that does not reward its pollinators. Supplementation of inflorescences with artificial nectar did not result in an increase in fruit set on supplemented inflorescences compared to control inflorescences and tended to reduce pollinia removal. Supplementation resulted in reduced fruit quality, but there was no evidence that this was as a result of inbreeding depression. Behavioral experiments showed that pollinating bumble bees, as predicted, visited more flowers on supplemented inflorescences. Bumble bees also deposited more self-pollen on supplemented inflorescences, but this was marginally significant. Bumble bee queens removed significantly more pollinia from control inflorescences, while Bombus terrestris and B. lucorum workers did not. I conclude that while pollinators behaved as predicted, there was weak evidence that pollinia removal, pollen deposition, and fruit set followed the predictions of the hypothesis. I argue that this was probably because some pollinators were more efficient at removing and depositing pollen on control inflorescences, while others were not.

Key Words: Anacamptis morioBombus • France • geitonogamy • nectarless flowers • Orchidaceae • pollinator behavior • pollinia







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the Botanical Society of America, Inc.