Pollinator parasites and the evolution of floral traits

Abstract

The main selective force driving floral evolution and diversity is plant–pollinator interactions. Pollinators use floral signals and indirect cues to assess flower reward, and the ensuing flower choice has major implications for plant fitness. While many pollinator behaviors have been described, the impact of parasites on pollinator foraging decisions and plant–pollinator interactions have been largely overlooked. Growing evidence of the transmission of parasites through the shared‐use of flowers by pollinators demonstrate the importance of behavioral immunity (altered behaviors that enhance parasite resistance) to pollinator health. During foraging bouts, pollinators can protect themselves against parasites through self‐medication, disease avoidance, and grooming. Recent studies have documented immune behaviors in foraging pollinators, as well as the impacts of such behaviors on flower visitation. Because pollinator parasites can affect flower choice and pollen dispersal, they may ultimately impact flower fitness. Here, we discuss how pollinator immune behaviors and floral traits may affect the presence and transmission of pollinator parasites, as well as how pollinator parasites, through these immune behaviors, can impact plant–pollinator interactions. We further discuss how pollinator immune behaviors can impact plant fitness, and how floral traits may adapt to optimize plant fitness in response to pollinator parasites. We propose future research directions to assess the role of pollinator parasites in plant–pollinator interactions and evolution, and we propose better integration of the role of pollinator parasites into research related to pollinator optimal foraging theory, floral diversity and agricultural practices.

Persistence and expansion of cryptic endangered red wolf genomic ancestry along the American Gulf coast

“…We explored the degree that incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) relative to gene flow could explain the above genetic structure patterns using the D statistic (Durand et al 2011). We expanded the dataset to include data from an outgroup population comprised of data from 45 red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) (DeCandia et al 2019), and repeated the SNP discovery pipeline. We catalogued 5,354,281 SNPs across 293 canids and 45 red foxes to identify derived alleles that were fixed in the red foxes as the ancestral homozygous genotype.…”

“…Following from the aforementioned methods in STACKS v2 for cataloguing and discovering SNP variants, we also independently repeated these methods with a larger dataset that included 45 red fox (Vulpes vulpes) previously published, with at least 100,000 mapped sequence reads (SRA PRJNA510648) (DeCandia et al 2019). We filtered in VCFtools v0.1.17 (Danecek et al 2011) to remove loci with >10% missing data across all individuals, singletons and private doubletons, and individuals with >20% missing data.…”

Honeybee Pests and Diseases in Nepal: A Review

“…The adult mites first attack and infest the prothoracic and complete their life cycle there (Sammataro et al, 2000). Piercing type mouthparts are the basic features of these mites that are ingested through wall of trachea (Fouks and Wagoner, 2019). These mites survive feeding the blood hemolymph.…”

“…The K shaped winged situation arises on bee that creates difficulty for bees to fly. As bees are unable to fly they can be observed crawling nearby the hives (Fouks and Wagoner, 2019). They are responsible for significant colony losses throughout the world.…”

Coevolução e exploração em redes de mutualismo

“…Interaction loss could impact species roles and ecosystem functions (Valiente-Banuet et al 2015). For example, exploiters coevolving with important pollinators could generate higher trait mismatch between the pollinator and the flower (Fouks & Wagoner 2019). Higher trait mismatch will lead to an interaction loss and together, the loss of their functionality of pollinator for this pairwise interaction.…”