Abstract
Flower constancy, or the tendency of individual pollinators to visit sequentially a single flower type even when other equally rewarding types are available, has important implications for animal-pollinated plants. Yet, the proximal reason for the behaviour still remains poorly understood. Here I show that bumblebees visiting equally rewarding flowers that differ in size and odour are more flower constant and less efficient (visited fewer flowers per minute) than bees visiting flowers that differ in size only and odour only. These results are consistent with the view that flower constancy in pollinators is related to their inability to perceive, process or recall multicomponent floral signals. I discuss these findings in the context of pollinator behavioural mechanisms and the evolution of floral diversity.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chittka L Thomson JD, Waser NM (1999) Flower constancy insect psychology and plant evolution. Naturwissenschaften 86:361–377
Darwin C (1876) On the effects of cross and self fertilization in the vegetable kingdom. Murray, London
Gegear RJ, Laverty TM (2001) The effect of variation among floral traits on the flower constancy of pollinators In: Chittka L, Thomson JD (eds) Cognitive ecology of pollination: animal behaviour and floral evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–20
Gegear RJ, Laverty TM (2005) Flower constancy in bumblebees: a test of the trait variability hypothesis. Anim Behav (in press)
Gegear RJ, Thomson JD (2004) Does the flower constancy of bees reflect foraging economics? Ethology 110:793–805
Grant V (1949) Pollination systems as isolating mechanisms in angiosperms. Evolution 3:82–97
Grant V (1994) Modes and origins of mechanical and ethological isolation in angiosperms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:3–10
Gumbert A, Kunze J, Chittka L (1999) Floral colour diversity in plant communities bee colour space and a null model. Proc R Soc Lond B 272:1711–1716
Heinrich B (1975) Bee flowers: a hypothesis on flower variety and blooming time. Evolution 29:325–334
Raguso RA (2004) Why are some floral nectars scented? Ecology 85:1486–1494
Rowe C (1999) Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Anim Behav 58:921–931
Waser NM (1983) The adaptive nature of floral traits: ideas and evidence. In: Real LA (ed) Pollination biology. Academic Press, New York, pp 241–285
Waser NM (1986) Flower constancy: definition cause and measurement. Am Nat 127:593–603
Wilson P, Stine M (1996) Floral constancy in bumblebees: handling efficiency or perceptual conditioning? Oecologia 106:493–499
Acknowledgements
I thank three anonymous referees for helpful comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by a post-doctoral fellowship awarded to R. J. Gegear from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gegear, R.J. Multicomponent floral signals elicit selective foraging in bumblebees. Naturwissenschaften 92, 269–271 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-005-0621-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-005-0621-5