4.1 Article

Influence of pollinator grooming on pollen-mediated gene dispersal in Mimulus ringens (Phrymaceae)

Journal

PLANT SPECIES BIOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 1, Pages 77-85

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-1984.2011.00329.x

Keywords

Bombus; gene dispersal; paternity analysis; pollen carryover; pollinator grooming

Funding

  1. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Graduate School
  2. National Science Foundation [DEB 9816712, DEB 9903308]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pollinator foraging patterns and the dynamics of pollen transport influence the quality and diversity of flowering plant mating opportunities. For species pollinated by grooming pollinators, such as bees, the amount of pollen carried between a donor flower and potential recipient flowers depends on how grooming influences pollen transfer. To investigate the relationship between grooming and pollen-mediated gene dispersal, we studied bumblebee (Bombus fervidus) foraging behavior and resulting gene dispersal in linear arrays of Mimulus ringens. Each of the 14 plants in an array had a unique multilocus genotype, facilitating unambiguous assignment of paternity to 1050 progeny. Each plant was trimmed to a single flower so that pollinator movements could be linked directly to resulting gene dispersal patterns. Pollen-mediated gene dispersal was very limited. More than 95% of the seeds sired by a donor flower were distributed over the first three recipient flowers in the visitation sequence. However, seeds were occasionally sired on flowers visited later in the pollinator's floral visitation sequence. Intensive grooming immediately following pollen removal from a donor flower significantly increased the decay rate of the donor flower's gene dispersal curve. These results suggest that the frequency and relative intensity of grooming can have significant effects on patterns of pollen-mediated gene dispersal from individual pollen donors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available