Pollination by Animals

Most flowering plants depend on flower-visiting animals such as bees for their sexual reproduction. Animal pollination is critical for crop and natural ecosystems and plays central roles in plant ecology and evolution.

Keywords: evolution; mutualism; pollination web; selection; specialization

Figure 1. Yuccas and yucca moths. (a) A female moth collects pollen actively with her mouthparts, after which she flies to a different plant (this is critical as yuccas are completely or partially self-incompatible). (b) The female then oviposits into the ovary of a new flower, after which she actively places pollen on the stigma. (c) Larvae develop within a single fruit and consume some, but not all, of its seeds. The plants abort fruits into which too many eggs are laid, thus exerting some control over ‘cheaters’ that devour most or all the seeds. From Riley CV (1892) The yucca moth and yucca pollination. Annual Report of the Missouri Botanical Garden 1892: 99–158.
Figure 2. A pollination web. Sampling of flower visitors over one fortnight in upland vegetation on the island of Mauritius, in the tropical Indian Ocean, yielded this bipartite graph of interactions among pollinators (numbered along the top, with width of each colored rectangle proportional to relative abundance of that species) and plants (along the bottom). Width of the wedge connecting animals to plants indicates the relative frequency of their interaction. The pollinators are colour coded as follows: red = Hymenoptera other than ants, magenta = Gekkonidae (only one species, Phelsuma cepediana, blue-tailed day gecko), blue = Coleoptera, dark green = Aves (one species, Zosterops mauritianus, grey white-eye), light green = Diptera, orange = Formicidae, yellow = Lepidoptera. The 32 plant species in this web were visited by a mean of 3.1 pollinator species each, whereas the 28 pollinator species visited a mean of 2.6 plants each. This web is a representative of pollination webs studied to date in that it contains a range of species from specialists to generalists, with specialists tending to interact with generalists rather than with other specialists. With permission from Kaiser (2006).
Figure 3. Disruptive selection on width of the flower tube (corolla) in Ipomopsis. In rare years, hawkmoths join hummingbirds as pollinators, and selection is disruptive, favouring the narrowest and widest tubes rather than intermediates. This situation recalls a scenario for pollinator-mediated speciation without geographical isolation. There is no significant selection on corolla length.
close
 References
    book Buchmann SL and Nabhan GP (1997) "Services provided by pollinators". In: Daily GC (ed.) Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems, pp. 133–150. Washington DC: Island Press.
    Campbell DR (2003) Natural selection in Ipomopsis hybrid zones: implications for ecological speciation. New Phytologist 161: 83–90.
    Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R et al. (1997) The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.
    Ehrlén J, Münzbergova Z, Diekmann M and Eriksson O (2006) Long-term assessment of seed limitation in plants: results from an 11-year experiment. Journal of Ecology 94: 1224–1232.
    Grimaldi DA (1999) The co-radiations of pollinating insects and angiosperms in the Cretaceous. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 86: 373–406.
    Herrera CM (1988) Variation in mutualisms: the spatiotemporal mosaic of a pollinator assemblage. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 35: 95–125.
    Ippolito A, Wilson Fernandes G and Holtsford TP (2004) Pollinator preferences for Nicotiana alata, N. forgetiana, and their F1 hybrids. Evolution 58: 2534–2544.
    other Kaiser CN (2006) Functional Integrity of Plant-Pollinator Communities in Restored Habitats in Mauritius. PhD Thesis, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
    Klein A-M, Vaissière BE, Cane JH et al. (2006) Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 274: 303–313.
    Knight TM, Steets JA, Vamosi JC et al. (2005) Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: pattern and process. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36: 467–497.
    Memmott J, Waser NM and Price MV (2004) Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 271: 2605–2611.
    book National Research Council (2007) Status of Pollinators in North America. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
    Ollerton J and Cranmer L (2002) Latitudinal trends in plant-pollinator interactions: are tropical plants more specialised? Oikos 98: 340–350.
    Pellmyr O (2003) Yuccas, yucca moths, and coevolution: a review. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 90: 35–55.
 Further Reading
    Bronstein JL, Alarcón R and Geber M (2006) The evolution of plant-insect mutualisms. New Phytologist 172: 412–428.
    book Chittka L and Thomson JD (2001) Cognitive Ecology of Pollination: Animal Behavior and Floral Evolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    book Harder LD and Barrett SCH (2006) Ecology and Evolution of Flowers. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    book Proctor M, Yeo P and Lack A (2003) The Natural History of Pollination, updated edition. London, UK: HarperCollins.
    book Waser NM and Ollerton J (2006) Plant-pollinator Interactions: from Specialization to Generalization. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Waser, Nickolas M(Sep 2007) Pollination by Animals. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0003163.pub2]