2006
DOI: 10.1086/507651
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Pollination Syndromes Partition the Pollinator Community? A Test Using Four Sympatric Morning Glory Species

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

6
23
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
6
23
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically, eight of ten pollinator groups showed consistent preferences for at least two floral traits of species from various families; whereas floral traits (two out of three categories) were related to stable ecological generalization levels in all 3 years. The consistent associations between most floral traits and pollinator functional groups have been suggested in several studies (e.g., Momose et al 1998;Dicks et al 2002;Nakano and Washitani 2003;Wolfe and Sowell 2006;Lázaro et al 2008). We found that pollinator preference of some lessabundant pollinator groups varied temporally.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Specifically, eight of ten pollinator groups showed consistent preferences for at least two floral traits of species from various families; whereas floral traits (two out of three categories) were related to stable ecological generalization levels in all 3 years. The consistent associations between most floral traits and pollinator functional groups have been suggested in several studies (e.g., Momose et al 1998;Dicks et al 2002;Nakano and Washitani 2003;Wolfe and Sowell 2006;Lázaro et al 2008). We found that pollinator preference of some lessabundant pollinator groups varied temporally.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Butterflies consistently preferred upward inflorescences. Most of these relationships fit the predictions of the classical pollination syndrome hypothesis (Faegri and van der Pijl 1979), which is well summarized in the appendix of Ollerton and Watts (2000), and has been observed in other community studies (e.g., McCall and Primack 1992;Momose et al 1998;Hingston and McQuillan 2000;Dicks et al 2002;Nakano and Washitani 2003;Wolfe and Sowell 2006;Lázaro et al 2008).…”
Section: Pollinator Preferencesupporting
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although most studies on pollination syndromes focus on one or a few plant species (e.g. Sahley 1996;Wolfe and Sowell 2006), a whole-community perspective is important for understanding the role of pollinator sharing on the effectiveness of different floral traits as pollinator attractors. A comparison among communities may also allow a determination of the extent to which the links between particular pollinators and particular floral traits are dependent on the local combination of plant and pollinator assemblages (McCall and Primack 1992;Hingston and McQuillan 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comumente as flores oferecem néctar e pólen como recursos florais, e são altamente atrativas a diferentes grupos de visitantes florais, especialmente no que se refere aos insetos (JUDD et al, 2009 Em virtude da similaridade morfológica, atributos florais semelhantes podem levar ao compartilhamento de visitantes florais ou até mesmo a competição por polinizadores, o que pode diminuir as chances de polinização e sucesso reprodutivo da planta. Na literatura, vários estudos clássicos relatam a partilha temporal e/ou espacial de visitantes florais em espécies simpátricas, a fim de aumentar o fitness reprodutivo, assim como relatado em comunidades de Acácias africanas (STONE et al, 1996;1998; e mexicanas (RAINE, 2001;RAINE et al, 2002), e com espécies de Convolvulaceae (WOLFE & SOWELL, 2006;PICK & SCHLINDWEIN, 2011).…”
unclassified