Seasonality of Fruit Characters and Seed Removal by Birds

Piper, Jon K.

doi:10.2307/3565827

Cited by 52 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This degree of fruit removal by birds is at the higher end of the range recorded for most other plant species (e.g., Krtisi & Debussche 1988;Herrera 1984;Piper 1986), including some (e.g., Crataegus monogyna: Courtney & Manzur 1985) that are naturalised in New Zealand.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Fruit selection by birds in relation to fruit abundance and appearance in the naturalised shrub Berberis darwinii

Allen

Lee

1992

New Zealand Journal of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of three forms of fruit damage were tested on avian selection of the fleshy fruits of Darwin's barberry (Berberis darwiniO from plastic trays, and compared with the abundance of fruits and their removal rates from nearby bushes, in December-January near Dunedin, New Zealand. Ripe fruits were removed from bushes by four bird species: blackbird (Turdus merula), song thrush (T. philomelos), silvereye (Zosterops lateralis), and kereru (Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae). The abundance of ripe fruits reached a peak 15 days after commencement of the study. Removal of the artificially presented fruits was negligible during this period. During the subsequent 15 days, as natural ripe fruit abundance declined, up to 80% of fruits were removed from trays within five days of presentation of fresh material. There was no significant change in fruit removal rate from bushes over the study period. Tray-presented intact fruits, with or without glaucous bloom, were clearly preferred to those with beak marks or simulated insect damage, irrespective of the abundance of the natural fruit crop. Shrivelled fruits in the trays were not eaten by birds. It is concluded that UV reflectance associated with the presence of a waxy bloom does not increase fruit attractiveness to birds, but that physical alteration of fruit surface or shape by marking, puncture, or shrivelling reduces fruit selection. Barberry fruit abundance does not affect the selection of damaged fruits.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Fruit selection by birds in relation to fruit abundance and appearance in the naturalised shrub Berberis darwinii

Allen

Lee

1992

New Zealand Journal of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the presence of frugivorous insects within fruits has been hypothesized to have a negative effect on the rate of fruit removal by vertebrates, some experimental studies involving fruits infested with pulp-mining larvae have found that this generalization may not apply in all cases (Redford et al 1984, Piper 1986, Drew 1988. Data from experiments using one species of frugivorous tanager (Valburg 1992) strongly suggested that Acnistus fruits infested with pulp-mining insect larvae are preferred over ripened uninfested fruits in simultaneous choice trials.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Infestation in the form of pulp-mining insects may change the color, smell, consistency, taste, or other sensory characteristic of the fruit, altering its attractiveness. Although some infesting insects may decrease the attractiveness of fruits (Janzen 1983, Manzur and Courtney 1984, Jordano 1987, others do not deter vertebrate dispersers and are consumed along with the fruit (Redford et al 1984, Piper 1986, Scott and Black 1981, Valburg 1992. Given this variation noted among dispersers and fruits for preference or avoidance of infested fruits, and previous work suggesting that infested Acnistus fruits are palatable to some dispersers (Valburg 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Eating Infested Fruits: Interactions in a Plant-Disperser-Pest Triad

Valburg¹

1992

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Many factors can constrain the ability of plant populations to respond genetically to natural selection on phenotypes, including generation times that are often long, a high frequency of polygenic traits (but see Gottlieb 1984), heritability, size hierarchies, and other heterogeneities of population structure, spatial and temporal variation in the intensity of the interaction and of the outcome, countervailing selection pressures on correlated traits, gene flow among segments of a metapopulation, and phylogenetic constraints (see also Wheelwright and Orians 1982, Janzen 1983a, b, Schemske 1983, Howe 1984, Herrera 1985, 1986a, Thompson 1986, Jordano l987b, Wheelwright 1988, Craig et al 1988, particularly on the constraints on coevolution). But these features probably affect all three interactions of interest, so they cannot fully explain the apparent disparity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variation of Dispersal Phenology in a Bird‐Dispersed Shrub, Cornus Drummondii

Willson¹,

Whelan²

1993

Ecological Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variation in the timing of seed dispersal among individuals of Comus drummondii was marked at two sites in east-central Illinois. Individuals whose fruit crops were removed most quickly shared few characteristics. Fruit removal rates, dispersal efficiency (percent of total crop removed), and dispersal success (estimated percent of dispersed seeds attributable to each individual) were not closely related to characteristics of the fruits or the immediate environment of the parent plant. Although small fruit crops were often depleted proportionately faster than large crops, dispersal success relative to others in the population was positively related to crop size; i.e., plants with larger crops contributed more seeds to the total pool of dispersed seeds than plants with smaller crops.Over the 4-yr study, individual plants often exhibited between-year differences in ripening time, crop size, and pulp characteristics, but between-year correlations of traits were only sporadically significant. Crop size showed the most consistent between-year correlation (i.e., plants with large crops tended to make large crops in all years), but even this trait was not always correlated between years. Dispersal success was usually correlated between years, but dispersal efficiency was not.Annual (and sometimes site) differences in most dispersal-related plant traits and in dispersal efficiency and dispersal success were common. No plant traits except crop size had consistent effects on dispersal success, although we found some evidence of selective foraging. We suggest that fruit removal may be more a function of avian biology (flocking and social behavior, frequency of foraging interruptions, sun-seeking in cold weather, etc.) than of most characteristics of the fruiting plant.The ecological consequences of differences in dispersal phenology were variable between years. Postdispersal seed predation and germination success showed no consistent seasonal trends. The most important consequence of failure of early fruit dispersal may be a high probability of nondispersal (falling, rotting, being eaten by a predispersal seed predator or poor dispersal agent).Great variation in space and time in the outcome of bird/fruit interactions means that studies directed at the evolution of-the interactions need to have both larger sample sizes and longer duration than has been feasible so far.

show abstract

Seasonality of Fruit Characters and Seed Removal by Birds

Cited by 52 publications

References 26 publications

Fruit selection by birds in relation to fruit abundance and appearance in the naturalised shrub Berberis darwinii

Fruit selection by birds in relation to fruit abundance and appearance in the naturalised shrub Berberis darwinii

Eating Infested Fruits: Interactions in a Plant-Disperser-Pest Triad

Variation of Dispersal Phenology in a Bird‐Dispersed Shrub, Cornus Drummondii

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About