4.5 Article

Plant-pollinator interactions in New Caledonia influenced by introduced honey bees

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
Volume 91, Issue 11, Pages 1814-1827

Publisher

BOTANICAL SOC AMER INC
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.91.11.1814

Keywords

bird pollination; honey bee invasion; New Caledonia; plant-pollinator interactions; pollination

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The flora of New Caledonia is characterized by remarkably high species diversity, high endemicity, and an unusual abundance of archaic plant taxa. To investigate community-level pollination mutualism in this endemic ecosystem, we observed flower visitors on 99 plant species in 42 families of various types of vegetation. Among the 95 native plant species, the most dominant pollination system was melittophily (bee-pollinated, 46.3%), followed by phalaenophily (moth-pollinated, 20.0%), ornithophily (bird-pollinated, 11.6%), cantharophily (beetle-pollinated, 8.4%), myophily (fly-pollinated, 3.2%), chiropterophily (bat-pollinated, 3.2%), and anemophily (wind-pollinated, 3.2%). The prevalence of ornithophily by honeyeaters shows an ecological link to pollination mutualism in Australia. The relative dominance of phalaenophily is unique to New Caledonia, and is proposed to be related to the low diversity of the original bee fauna and the absence of long-tongued bees. Although some archaic plants maintain archaic plant-pollinator interactions, e.g., Zygogynum pollinated by micropterigid moths, or Hedycarya pollinated by thrips and staphylinid beetles, the most dominant organism observed on flowers was the introduced honey bee, Apis mellifera. The plant species now visited by honey bees are thought to have originally been pollinated by native solitary short-tongued bees. Our data suggest that the unique systems of pollination mutualism in New Caledonia are now endangered by the establishment of highly invasive honey bees.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available