The Hole Truth: Why Do Bumble Bees Rob Flowers More Than Once?

Plants Pub Date : 2024-09-06 DOI:10.3390/plants13172507
Judith L. Bronstein, Goggy Davidowitz, Elinor M. Lichtenberg, Rebecca E. Irwin
{"title":"The Hole Truth: Why Do Bumble Bees Rob Flowers More Than Once?","authors":"Judith L. Bronstein, Goggy Davidowitz, Elinor M. Lichtenberg, Rebecca E. Irwin","doi":"10.3390/plants13172507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Primary nectar-robbers feed through holes they make in flowers, often bypassing the plant’s reproductive organs in the process. In many robbed plants, multiple holes are made in a single flower. Why a flower should be robbed repeatedly is difficult to understand: a hole signals that a nectar forager has already fed, which would seem likely to predict low rewards. We tested three explanations for this pattern in Corydalis caseana (Fumariaceae), a bumble bee pollinated and robbed plant: (1) multiple holes appear only after all flowers have been robbed once; (2) individual foragers make multiple holes during single visits; and (3) it is more profitable for bees to rob older flowers, even if they have already been robbed. We tested these hypotheses from 2014 to 2016 in a Colorado, USA population using data on robbing rates over time, floral longevity, nectar accumulation in visited and unvisited flowers, and the accumulation of robbing holes across the life of flowers. Multiple holes were already appearing when two-thirds of flowers still lacked a single hole, allowing us to reject the first hypothesis. The second hypothesis cannot offer a full explanation for multiple robbing holes because 35% of additional holes appeared in flowers one or more days after the first hole was made. Repeated sampling of bagged and exposed inflorescences revealed that flowers filled at a constant rate and refilled completely after being drained. Consequently, young flowers are of consistently low value to foragers compared to older flowers even if they had previously been robbed, consistent with the third hypothesis. While further studies are needed, these results offer a simple explanation for the paradoxical clustering of nectar-robbing damage in this and possibly other plant species.","PeriodicalId":20103,"journal":{"name":"Plants","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13172507","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Primary nectar-robbers feed through holes they make in flowers, often bypassing the plant’s reproductive organs in the process. In many robbed plants, multiple holes are made in a single flower. Why a flower should be robbed repeatedly is difficult to understand: a hole signals that a nectar forager has already fed, which would seem likely to predict low rewards. We tested three explanations for this pattern in Corydalis caseana (Fumariaceae), a bumble bee pollinated and robbed plant: (1) multiple holes appear only after all flowers have been robbed once; (2) individual foragers make multiple holes during single visits; and (3) it is more profitable for bees to rob older flowers, even if they have already been robbed. We tested these hypotheses from 2014 to 2016 in a Colorado, USA population using data on robbing rates over time, floral longevity, nectar accumulation in visited and unvisited flowers, and the accumulation of robbing holes across the life of flowers. Multiple holes were already appearing when two-thirds of flowers still lacked a single hole, allowing us to reject the first hypothesis. The second hypothesis cannot offer a full explanation for multiple robbing holes because 35% of additional holes appeared in flowers one or more days after the first hole was made. Repeated sampling of bagged and exposed inflorescences revealed that flowers filled at a constant rate and refilled completely after being drained. Consequently, young flowers are of consistently low value to foragers compared to older flowers even if they had previously been robbed, consistent with the third hypothesis. While further studies are needed, these results offer a simple explanation for the paradoxical clustering of nectar-robbing damage in this and possibly other plant species.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
洞穴真相:为什么大黄蜂会多次抢花?
初级盗蜜者通过在花朵上打洞取食,在此过程中往往会绕过植物的生殖器官。在许多被盗花植物中,一朵花上会有多个洞。我们很难理解为什么一朵花会被反复打洞:打洞意味着采蜜者已经采食过花蜜,这似乎预示着低回报。我们在一种被熊蜂授粉和抢花的植物 Corydalis caseana(Fumariaceae)上测试了这种模式的三种解释:(1)只有在所有花朵都被抢过一次之后,才会出现多个洞;(2)个体觅食者在单次访问中会打多个洞;(3)对蜜蜂来说,抢夺较老的花朵更有利可图,即使这些花朵已经被抢过。我们从 2014 年到 2016 年在美国科罗拉多州的一个种群中利用随时间变化的盗洞率、花朵寿命、访问过和未访问过的花朵中的花蜜积累以及花朵生命周期中盗洞的积累等数据对上述假设进行了检验。当三分之二的花朵还没有一个盗洞时,多个盗洞就已经出现了,因此我们可以否定第一个假设。第二种假设不能完全解释多个盗洞的原因,因为有 35% 的额外盗洞出现在第一个盗洞出现后一天或更多天的花朵上。对袋装花序和裸露花序的重复取样表明,花朵的填充速度是恒定的,并且在排水后会完全重新填充。因此,与较老的花朵相比,年轻的花朵对觅食者的价值始终较低,即使它们之前曾被抢夺过,这与第三个假设一致。虽然还需要进一步的研究,但这些结果为该植物物种以及其他可能的植物物种中花蜜被盗的矛盾性聚集现象提供了一个简单的解释。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Spatio-Temporal Variations of Volatile Metabolites as an Eco-Physiological Response of a Native Species in the Tropical Forest Development of Cost-Effective SNP Markers for Genetic Variation Analysis and Variety Identification in Cultivated Pears (Pyrus spp.) Biosynthesis of Piceatannol from Resveratrol in Grapevine Can Be Mediated by Cresolase-Dependent Ortho-Hydroxylation Activity of Polyphenol Oxidase Effect of Drought and Rehydration on Physiological Characteristics of Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq. in Different Habitats Identification and Evaluation of Diploid and Tetraploid Passiflora edulis Sims
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1