Micro-organisms behind the pollination scenes: microbial imprint on floral nectar sugar variation in a tropical plant community

Canto, Azucena; Herrera, Carlos M.

doi:10.1093/aob/mcs183

Cited by 79 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In H. foetidus, for example, reported variation between flowers, individuals, and populations in number of pollen tubes in the style (Herrera 2002) might be partly accounted for by the patchy distribution of M. reukaufii at different spatial scales. Nectar yeast abundance and variability levels comparable to or greater than those generated experimentally in this study seem to be the rule in natural habitats worldwide (Brysch-Herzberg 2004, Canto and Herrera 2012. This implies that the functional links between nectar yeasts, pollinator behavior, and plant reproductive success found here may also hold for other animal-pollinated plants elsewhere.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…One infrequently acknowledged biotic factor potentially altering nectar features is nectardwelling yeasts, which recent studies have shown to abundantly populate animal-pollinated flowers worldwide (Brysch-Herzberg 2004, Herrera et al 2009). Among other effects, nectar yeasts can alter the composition and concentration of sugars and amino acids in nectar, contribute to the emission of floral volatiles, and warm the nectar in relation to the surrounding air (Raguso 2004, Wiens et al 2008, Canto and Herrera 2012. Microbial alterations of the intrafloral environment might influence the behavior of pollinators, which could in turn impinge on pollination success and fecundity of plants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Yeasts in nectar of an early‐blooming herb: sought by bumble bees, detrimental to plant fecundity

Herrera

Pozo

Medrano

2013

Ecology

156

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through their effects on physicochemical features of floral nectar, nectar‐dwelling yeasts can alter pollinator behavior, but the effect of such changes on pollination success and plant reproduction is unknown. We present results of experiments testing the effects of nectar yeasts on foraging patterns of captive and free‐ranging bumble bees, and also on pollination success and fecundity of the early‐blooming, bumble bee‐pollinated Helleborus foetidus (Ranunculaceae). Under controlled experimental conditions, inexperienced Bombus terrestris workers responded positively to the presence of yeasts in artificial sugar solutions mimicking floral nectar by visiting proportionally more yeast‐containing artificial flowers. Free‐ranging bumble bees also preferred yeast‐containing nectar in the field. Experiments conducted in two different years consistently showed that natural and artificial nectars containing yeasts were more thoroughly removed than nectars without yeasts. Experimental yeast inoculation of the nectar of H. foetidus flowers was significantly associated with reductions in number of pollen tubes in the style, fruit set, seed set, and mass of individual seeds produced. These results provide the first direct evidence to date that nectar yeasts can modify pollinator foraging patterns, pollination success, and the quantity and quality of seeds produced by insect‐pollinated plants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Yeasts in nectar of an early‐blooming herb: sought by bumble bees, detrimental to plant fecundity

Herrera

Pozo

Medrano

2013

Ecology

156

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nectar also can contain other sugars that are present in trace amounts, e.g., mannose, arabinose, xylose, maltose, melibiose and oligosaccharides such as raffinose, melezitose, stachyose and sorbitol (Nicolson and Thornburg 2007, and references therein). It is worth noting that nectar-dwelling microorganisms can significantly influence/modify nectar-sugar profiles (Canto and Herrera 2012;Vannette et al 2012;de Vega and Herrera 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nectaries and male-biased nectar production in protandrous flowers of a perennial umbellifer Angelica sylvestris L. (Apiaceae)

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nectar is the most common floral pollinator reward. In dichogamous species, floral nectar production rates can differ between sexual phases. We studied the structure of nectaries located on the stylopodium and nectar production in protandrous umbellifer Angelica sylvestris. Our study species produced nectar in both floral sexual phases. Nectar sugar concentration was low (on average 22 ± 11 %, mean ± SD) and the nectar hexose rich and composed of sucrose, glucose, fructose and a small amount of amino acids, including b-alanine, a non-protein amino acid. Although nectar composition and sugar concentration varied little between floral sexual phases, nectar production showed a threefold reduction during the stigma receptive period. This is in contrast to other studies of Apiaceae that have reported female-biased nectar production, but in the direction predicted by plant sexual selection theory, suggesting that in pollen-unlimited species, floral rewards mainly enhance male reproductive success. The structure of the nectary was similar at the two sexual stages investigated, and composed of a secretory epidermis and several layers of nectariferous and subsecretory parenchyma. The nectary cells were small, had large nuclei, numerous small vacuoles and dense, intensely staining cytoplasm with abundant endoplasmic reticulum, mitochondria and secretory vesicles. They contained abundant resin-like material that may potentially act as defence against microbes. Starch was rarely observed in the nectary cells, occurring predominantly at the female stage and mainly in guard and parenchyma cells in close proximity to stomata, and in subsecretory parenchyma. The main route of nectar release in A. sylvestris seems to be via modified stomata.

show abstract

“…Yeasts are very common in floral nectar. About half the samples collected in tropical and temperate plant communities proved positive for yeasts and showed a preponderance of basidiomycetous and ascomycetous species of the genera Cryptococcus, Metschnikowia, and Candida [61,62].…”

Section: Nectar Dwelling Microorganisms and Their Impact On Pollinatomentioning

confidence: 99%

New perspectives in nectar evolution and ecology: simple alimentary reward or a complex multiorganism interaction?

Nepi

2017

Acta Agrobot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral and extra-floral nectars are secretions elaborated by specific organs (nectaries) that can be associated with plant reproductive structures (the so-called floral nectaries found only in angiosperms) or vegetative parts (extrafloral nectaries). These secretions are common in terrestrial vascular plants, especially angiosperms. Although gymnosperms do not seem to have true nectar, their ovular secretions may share evolutionary links with angiosperm nectar. Nectar is generally involved in interactions with animals and by virtue of its sugar and amino acid content, it has been considered a reward offered by plants to animals in exchange for benefits, mainly pollination and indirect defense against herbivores. These relationships are often cited as examples of classical mutualistic interactions. Nonetheless, recent studies dealing with compounds less abundant than sugars and amino acids challenge this view and suggest that nectar is much more complex than simply a reward in the form of food. Nectar proteins (nectarins) and nectar secondary compounds have no primary nutritious function but are involved in plant-animal relationships in other ways. Nectarins protect against proliferation of microorganisms and infection of plant tissues by pathogens. Nectar secondary compounds can be involved in modulating the behavior of nectar feeders, maximizing benefits for the plant. Nectar-dwelling microorganisms (mainly yeasts) were recently revealed to be a third partner in the scenario of plant-animal interactions mediated by nectar. There is evidence that yeast has a remarkable impact on nectar feeder behavior, although the effects on plant fitness have not yet been clearly assessed. Keywords nectar; plant-animal interactions; indirect defense; pollination; nectar secondary compounds; nectar proteins; microorganisms The evolution and diversity of nectaries and nectarAccording to the classical theory of plant-animal coevolution, nectar -a sugary plant secretion -is considered a trait that evolved in two types of mutualistic interactions involving plants and animals: indirect defense against herbivores and pollen dispersal.Plants may defend against herbivores directly, through anatomical and/or chemical cues, or indirectly by attracting pugnacious ants that prey on herbivores or deter them from feeding on the plant. Indirect defense against herbivores is mediated by so-called extra-floral nectaries, i.e., nectaries generally located in vegetative parts of the plant (Fig. 1a) and never involved in pollination. On the other hand, pollen dispersal is favored by nectar close to the reproductive organs of angiosperm flowers, in so-called floral nectaries (Fig. 1b).

show abstract

Micro-organisms behind the pollination scenes: microbial imprint on floral nectar sugar variation in a tropical plant community

Cited by 79 publications

References 74 publications

Yeasts in nectar of an early‐blooming herb: sought by bumble bees, detrimental to plant fecundity

Yeasts in nectar of an early‐blooming herb: sought by bumble bees, detrimental to plant fecundity

Nectaries and male-biased nectar production in protandrous flowers of a perennial umbellifer Angelica sylvestris L. (Apiaceae)

New perspectives in nectar evolution and ecology: simple alimentary reward or a complex multiorganism interaction?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About