Over the last fifty years there has been a continual reduction in horticultural and agricultural biodiversity of nutritionally important plants, including those of the Solanaceae family. To add to this, the broad range of traditional crops, previously grown on a sustainable scale in some parts of the world, has been replaced by a narrow range of major crops grown as large-scale monocultures. In order to counteract this trend, and to help maintain a broad wealth of genetic resources, conservation is essential. This, in turn, helps to safeguard food security. A taxonomic inventory, covering the diversity of species in a plant group, is an important first step in conservation. The Solanaceae is one of the major plant families providing food species. A survey of the biodiversity, ethnobotany and taxonomy of subfamily Solanoideae was undertaken and is presented here as an inventory of food species. Fifteen genera provide species that are utilised for food across the world. Of these, only four genera contain economically significant cultivated food cropspecies. The majority of these are in the genus Solanum, whilst Capsicum, Physalis and Lycium contribute the remainder of cultivated crop species. These genera and others also comprise species that are semi-cultivated, tolerated as useful weeds, or gathered from the wild.

No abstract

No abstract

The South American lulo (Solanum quitoense Lam.) is a crop plant of the Andes of Ecuador and Colombia, pollinated by South American bumblebees, such as, Bombus atratus Franklin. The cultivation of lulo outside of its native range, for example in European glasshouses, requires the presence of efficient pollinators to enable high fruit set and yield. Until now, the suitability of Bombus terrestris L., native to Europe and commonly used in agriculture, has been untested for this purpose. In this study, the pollencollecting behaviour of B. terrestris when visiting lulo flowers was investigated. It was shown that B. terrestris adopted the lulo as a pollen source, and on average visited three flowers per minute, had five buzzing events per stay and foraged for 15 s on a single flower, independently of the previous number of visits and level of bruising to the anthers. The pollination efficiency of five different treatments was evaluated: (i) exclusion of bees, (ii) single and (iii) multiple visits of B. terrestris, (iv) self-and (v) cross-pollination by hand. The results clearly demonstrated that, for fruit set, pollination is crucial. It was also found that lulo flowers can be successfully self-pollinated, but give 25% fewer fruit set compared with pollination via multiple bumblebee visits, or cross-pollination by hand. Fruit set, seed set and fruit size were as high with pollination by B. terrestris as with crosspollination by hand, indicating that this bumblebee is an appropriate pollinator for lulo. However, B. terrestris was conspicuously less effective when a flower was visited only once. Therefore, when growing lulos commercially, multiple bumblebee visits should be encouraged, but it is likely that the behaviour of B. terrestris would ensure this anyway. Our results indicate that B. terrestris is a suitable and efficient pollinator for the production of lulo fruits.

No abstract