Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: Pattern and process

Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics

Volumn 36, Issue , 2005, Pages 467-497

  Knight, Tiffany M ^a   Steets, Janette A ^b   Vamosi, Jana C ^c   Mazer, Susan J ^d   Burd, Martin ^e   Campbell, Diane R ^f   Dudash, Michele R ^g   Johnston, Mark O ^h   Mitchell, Randall J ⁱ   Ashman, Tia Lynn ^b  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR ECOLOGICAL ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g University of Maryland   (United States)

^h DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF AKRON   (United States)

Author keywords

Breeding system; Floral traits; Meta analysis; Phylogenetically independent contrasts; Pollination; Resource limitation

Indexed keywords

POLLEN LIMITATION; POLLINATION; REPRODUCTION;

EID: 27144480367     PISSN: 00664162     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.102403.115320     Document Type: Review

References (189)

1. Ågren J. 1996. Population size, pollinator limitation, and seed set in the self-incompatible herb Lythrum salicaria. Ecology 77:1779-90
2. Aizen MA, Ashworth L, Galetto L. 2002. Reproductive success in fragmented habitats: do compatibility systems and pollination specialization matter? J. Veg. Sci. 13:885-92
3. Amarasekare P. 2004. Spatial dynamics of mutualistic interactions. J. Anim. Ecol. 73:128-42
4. Armbruster WS, Mulder CPH, Baldwin BG, Kalisz S, Wessa B, et al. 2002. Comparative analysis of late floral development and mating system evolution in tribe Collinsieae (Scrophulariaceae S.L.). Am. J. Bot. 89:37-49
5. Ashman T-L. 2000. Pollinator selectivity and its implications for the evolution of dioecy and sexual dimorphism. Ecology 81:2577-91
6. Ashman T-L, Diefenderfer C. 2001. Sex ratio represents a unique context for selection on attractive traits: consequences for the evolution of sexual dimorphism. Am. Nat. 157:334-47
7. Ashman T-L, Knight TM, Steets JA, Amarasekare P, Burd M, et al. 2004. Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology,. 85:2408-21
8. Ashman T-L, Morgan MT. 2004. Explaining phenotypic selection on plant attractive characters: male function, gender balance or ecological context? Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 271:553-59
9. Ashman T-L, Schoen DJ. 1994. How long should flowers live? Nature 371:788-91
10. Ashman T-L, Schoen DJ. 1996. Floral longevity: fitness consequences and resource costs. In Floral Biology, ed. SCH Barrett, DG Lloyd, pp. 112-39. New York: Chapman & Hall
11. Baker AM, Barrett SCH, Thompson JD. 2000. Variation of pollen limitation in the early flowering Mediterranean geophyte Narcissus assoanus (Amaryllidaceae). Oecologia 124:529-35
12. Baker HG. 1955. Self-compatibility and establishment after "long-distance" dispersal. Evolution 9:347-49
13. Baker HG. 1967. Support for Baker's Law - as a rule. Evolution 21:853-56
14. Balvanera P, Kremen C, Martinez-Ramos M. 2005. Applying community structure analysis to ecosystem function: examples from pollination and carbon storage. Ecol. App. 15:360-75
15. Bateman AJ. 1948. Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2:349-68
16. Bertness MD, Shumway SW. 1992. Consumer driven pollen limitation of seed production in marsh grasses. Am. J. Bot. 79:288-93
17. Bierzychudek P. 1981. Pollinator limitation of plant reproductive effort. Am. Nat. 117:838-40
18. Blomberg SP, Garland T, Ives AR. 2003. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57:717-45
19. Bond WJ. 1994. Do mutualisms matter? Assessing the impact of pollinator and disperser disruption on plant extinction. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B 344:83-90
20. Brown BJ, Mitchell RJ, Graham SA. 2002. Competition for pollination between an invasive species (purple loosestrife) and a native congener. Ecology 83:2328-36
21. Buchmann SL, Nabhan GP. 1996 The Forgotten Pollinators. Washington DC: Island
22. Burd M. 1994. Bateman's principle and plant reproduction: the role of pollen limitation in fruit and seed set. Bot. Rev. 60:83-139
23. Burd M. 1995. Ovule packaging in stochastic pollination and fertilization environments. Evolution 49:100-9
24. Calvo RN. 1993. Evolutionary demography of orchids: intensity and frequency of pollination and the cost of fruiting. Ecology 74:1033-42
25. Calvo RN, Horvitz CC. 1990. Pollinator limitation cost of reproduction, and fitness in plants: a transition-matrix demographic approach. Am. Nat. 136:499-516
26. Campbell DR. 1985. Pollinator sharing and seed set of Stellaria pubera: competition for pollination. Ecology 66:544-53
27. Campbell DR, Halama KJ. 1993. Resource and pollen limitations to lifetime seed production in a natural plant population. Ecology 74:1043-51
28. Campbell DR, Motten AF. 1985. The mechanism of competition for pollination between two forest herbs. Ecology 66:554-63
29. Campbell DR, Waser NM, Price MV. 1994. Indirect selection of stigma position in Ipomopsis aggregata via a genetically correlated trait. Evolution 48:55-68
30. Carlsson-Graner U, Elmqvist T, Agren J, Gardfjell H, Ingvarsson P. 1998. Floral sex ratios, disease and seed set in dioecious Silene dioica. J. Ecol. 86:79-91
31. Caruso CM. 1999. Pollination of Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae): effects of intra-vs. interspecific competition. Am. J. Bot. 86:662-68
32. Caruso CM. 2001. Differential selection on floral traits of Ipomopsis aggregata growing in contrasting environments. Oikos 94:295-302
33. Caruso CM. 2002. Influence of plant abundance on pollination and selection on floral traits of Ipomopsis aggregata. Ecology 83:241-54
34. Casper BB, Niesenbaum RA. 1993. Pollen versus resource limitation of seed production: a reconsideration. Curr. Sci. 65:210-14
35. Charlesworth D. 1985. Distribution of dioecy and self-incompatibility in angiosperms. In Evolution-Essays in Honour of John Maynard Smith, ed. PJ Greenwood, M Slatkin, pp. 237-68. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
36. Charlesworth D. 1993. Why are unisexual flowers associated with wind pollination and unspecialized pollinators? Am. Nat. 141:481-90
37. Charpentier A. 2001. Consequences of clonal growth for plant mating. Evol. Ecol. 15:521-30
38. Culley TM, Weller SG, Sakai AK. 2002. The evolution of wind pollination in angiosperms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17:361-69
39. Cunningham SA. 2000. Depressed pollination in habitat fragments causes low fruit set. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 267:1149-52
40. Davis HG, Taylor CM, Lambrinos JG, Strong DR. 2004. Pollen limitation causes an Allee effect in a wind-pollinated invasive grass (Spartina alterniflora). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:13804-7
41. Dudash MR, Fenster CB. 1997. Multiyear study of pollen limitation and cost of reproduction in the iteroparous Silene virginica. Ecology 78:484-93
42. Dukas R. 2001. Effects of perceived danger on flower choice by bees. Ecol. Lett. 4:327-33
43. Dukas R, Morse DH. 2003. Crab spiders affect flower visitation by bees. Oikos 101:157-63
44. Eckhart VM. 1992. Spatio-temporal variation in abundance and variation in foraging behavior of the pollinators of gynodioecious Phacelia linearis (Hydrophyllaceae). Oikos 64:573-86
45. Ehrlén J, Eriksson O. 1995. Pollen limitation and population growth in a herbaceous perennial legume. Ecology 76:652-56
46. Fausto JA, Eckhart VM, Geber MA. 2001. Reproductive assurance and the evolutionary ecology of self-pollination in Clarkia xantiana (Onagraceae). Am. J. Bot. 88:1794-1800
47. Feinsinger P, Tiebout HM, Young BE. 1991. Do tropical bird-pollinated plants exhibit density-dependent interactions? Field experiments in a chaco dry forest, Argentina. Ecology 72:1953-63
48. Feldman TS, Morris WF, Wilson WG. 2004. When can two plant species facilitate each other's pollination? Oikos 105:197-207
49. Felsenstein J. 1985. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 125:1-15
50. Felsenstein J. 1988. Phylogenies and quantitative traits. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 19:445-71
51. Fenster CB, Armbruster WS, Wilson P, Dudash MR, Thomson JD. 2004. Pollination syndromes and floral specialization. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 35:375-403
52. Fishbein M, Venable DL. 1996. Evolution of inflorescence design: theory and data. Evolution 50:2165-17
53. Forsyth SA. 2003. Density-dependent seed set in the Haleakala silversword: evidence for an Allee effect. Oecologia 136:551-57
54. Franceschinelli EV, Bawa KS. 2000. The effect of ecological factors on the mating system of a South American shrub species (Helicteres brevispira). Heredity 84:116-23
55. Galen C, Gregory T. 1989. Interspecific pollen transfer as a mechanism of competition: consequences of foreign pollen contamination for seed set in the alpine wildflower, Polemonium viscosum. Oecologia 81:120-23
56. Galen C, Plowright RC, Thompson JD. 1985. Floral biological and regulation of seed set and seed size in the lily, Clintonia borealis. Am. J. Bot. 72:1544-52
57. Garcia MB, Ehrlén J. 2002. Reproductive effort and herbivory timing in a perennial herb: fitness components at the individual and population levels. Am. J. Bot. 89:1295-302
58. Garland T, Harvey PH, Ives AR. 1992. Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Syst. Biol. 41:18-32
59. Goldingay RE. 2000. Further assessment of pollen limitation in the waratah (Telopea speciosissima). Aust. J. Bot. 48:209-14
60. Grab It, version 1. 1998. DataTrend Software
61. Grabas GP, Laverty TM. 1999. The effect of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L; Eythraceae) on the pollination and reproductive success of sympatric co-flowering wetland plants. Ecoscience 6:230-42
62. Groom MJ. 2001. Consequences of subpopulation isolation for pollination, herbivory, and population growth in Clarkia concinna concinna (Onagraceae). Biol. Cons. 100:55-63
63. Gross CL. 1996. Is resource overlap disadvantageous to three sympatric legumes? Aust. J. Ecol. 21:133-43
64. Gross RS, Werner PA. 1983. Relationships among flowering phenology, insect visitors, and seed-set of individuals: experimental studies on four co-occurring species of goldenrod (Solidago: Compositae). Ecol. Monogr. 53:95-117
65. Gurevitch J, Curtis PS, Jones MH. 2001. Meta-analysis in ecology. Adv. Ecol. Res. 32:200-47
66. Hackney EE, McGraw JB. 2001. Experimental demonstration of an Allee effect in American ginseng. Cons. Biol. 15:129-36
67. Haig D, Westoby M. 1988. On limits to seed production. Am. Nat. 131:757-59
68. Hanley ME, Goulson D. 2003. Introduced weeds pollinated by introduced bees: cause or effect? Weed Biol. Manage. 3:204-12
69. Harvey PH, Mace GM. 1982. Comparisons Between Taxa and Adaptive Trends: Problems of Methodology. King's. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
70. Harvey PH, Partridge L, eds. 1989. Comparative Methods Using Phylogenetically Independent Contrasts. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
71. Hedges LV, Gurevitch J, Curtis PS. 1999. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80:1150-56
72. Herrera CM. 1988. Variation in mutualisms - the spatio-temporal mosaic of a pollinator assemblage. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 35:95-125
73. Herrera CM. 1996. Floral traits and plant adaptation to insect pollinators: a devil's advocate approach. In Floral Biology, ed. D Llyod, SCH Barrett, pp. 65-87. New York: Chapman & Hall
74. Holland JN. 2002. Benefits and costs of mutualism: demographic consequences in a pollinating seed-consumer interaction. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 269:1405-12
75. Horvitz CC, Schemske DW. 1990. Spatiotemporal variation in insect mutualists of a neotropical herb. Ecology 71:1085-97
76. Igic B, Bohs L, Kohn JR. 2003. Historical inferences from the self-incompatibility locus. New Phytol. 161:97-105
77. Irwin RE, Brody AK, Waser NM. 2001. The impact of floral larceny on individuals, populations, and communities. Oecologia 129:161-68
78. Ishii R, Higashi M. 2001. Coexistence induced by pollen limitation in flowering-plant species. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 268:579-85
79. Iwaizumi MG, Sakai S. 2004. Variation in flower biomass among nearby populations of Impatiens textori (Balsaminaceae): effects of population plant densities. Can. J. Bot. 82:563-72
80. Jain SK. 1976. The evolution of inbreeding in plant. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 7:469-95
81. Janzen DH. 1977. A note on optimal mate selection in plants. Am. Nat. 111:365-71
82. Jennersten O. 1988. Pollination of Dianthus deltoides (Caryophyllaceae): effects of habitat fragmentation on visitation and seed set. Cons. Biol. 2:359-66
83. Jennersten O, Berg L, Lehman C. 1988. Phenological differences in pollinator visitation, pollen deposition and seed set in the sticky catchfly, Viscaria vulgaris. J. Ecol. 76:1111-32
84. Johnson SD, Collin CL, Wissman HJ, Halvarsson E, Ågren J. 2004. Factors contributing to variation in seed production among remnant populations of the endangered daisy Gerbera aurantiaca. Biotropica 36:148-55
85. Johnson SD, Peter CI, Nilsson LA, Agren J. 2003. Pollination success in a deceptive orchid is enhanced by co-occurring rewarding magnet plants. Ecology 84:2919-27
86. Johnston MO. 1991a. Natural selection of floral traits in 2 species of Lobelia with different pollinators. Evolution 45:1468-79
87. Johnston MO. 1991b. Pollen limitation of femal reproduction in Lobelia cardinalis and L. siphilitica. Ecology 72:1500-3
88. Juenger T, Bergelson J. 1997. Pollen and resource limitation of compensation to herbivory in scarlet gilia, Ipomopsis aggregata. Ecology 78:1684-95
89. Kalisz S, Hanzawa FM, Tonsor SJ, Thiede DA, Voigt S. 1999. Ant-mediated seed dispersal alters pattern of relatedness in a population of Trillium grandiflorum. Ecology 80:2620-34
90. Karron JD, Thumser NN, Tucker R, Hessenauer AJ. 1995. The influence of population density on outcrossing rates in Mimulus ringens. Heredity 75:175-80
91. Kearns CA, Inouye DW, Waser NM. 1998. Endangered mutualisms: the conservation of plant-pollinator interactions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29:83-112
92. Klinkhamer PGL, de Jong TJ. 1990. Effects of plant size, plant-density and sex differential nectar reward on pollinator visitation in the Protandrous Echium vulgare (Boraginaceae). Oikos 57:399-405
93. Knight TM. 2003. Floral density, pollen limitation, and reproductive success in Trillium grandiflorum. Oecologia 137:557-63
94. Knight TM, McCoy MW, Chase JM, McCoy KA, Holt RD. 2005. Tropic cascades across ecosystems. Nature. In press
95. Kremen C, Ricketts TH. 2000. Global perspectives on pollination disruptions. Cons. Biol. 14:1226-28
96. Kremen C, Williams NM, Thorp RW. 2002. Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:16812-16
97. Krupnick GA, Weis AE. 1999. The effect of floral herbivory on male and female reproductive success in Isomeris arborea. Ecology 80:135-49
98. Kunin WE. 1993. Sex and the single mustard: Population-density and pollinator behavior effects on seed-set. Ecology 74:2145-60
99. Kunin WE. 1997. Population size and density effects in pollination: pollinator foraging and plant reproductive success in experimental arrays of Brassica kaber. J. Ecol. 85:225-34
100. Larson BMH, Barrett SCH. 2000. A comparative analysis of pollen limitation in flowering plants. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 69:503-20
101. Laverty TM. 1992. Plant interactions for pollinator visits: a test of the magnet species effect. Oecologia 89:502-8
102. Le Corff J, Ågren J, Schemske DW. 1998. Floral display, pollinator discrimination, and female reproductive success in two monoecious Begonia species. Ecology 79:1610-19
103. Lehtila K, Syrjanen K. 1995. Positive effects of pollination on subsequent size, reproduction, and survival of Primula veris. Ecology 76:1084-98
104. Lennartsson T. 2002. Extinction thresholds and disrupted plant pollinator interactions in fragmented plant populations. Ecology 83:3060-72
105. Linhart Y, Feinsinger P. 1980. Plant-hummingbird interactions: effects of island size and degree of specialization on pollination. J. Ecol. 68:745-55
106. Liston A, Rieseberg LH, Elias TS. 1990. Functional androdioecy in the flowering plant Datisca glomerata. Nature 343:641-42
107. Liu H, Koptur S. 2003. Breeding system and pollination of a narrowly endemic herb of the Lower Florida Keys: impacts of the urban-wildland interface. Am. J. Bot. 90:1180-87
108. Lloyd DG. 1979. Some reproductive factors affecting the selection of self-fertilization in plants. Am. Nat. 113:6779
109. Lloyd DG, Schoen DJ. 1992. Self-fertilization and cross fertilization in plants. 1. Functional dimensions. Int. J. Plant Sci. 153:358-69
110. Lu YQ. 2000. Effects of density on mixed mating systems and reproduction in natural populations of Impatiens capensis. Int. J. Plant Sci. 161:671-81
111. Maurice S, Fleming TH. 1995. The effect of pollen limitation on plant reproductive systems and the maintenance of sexual polymorphisms. Oikos 74:55-60
112. Mizui N, Kikuzawa K. 1991. Proximate limitations to fruit and seed set in Phellodendron amurense var. sachalinense. Plant Species Biol. 6:39-46
113. Moeller DA. 2004. Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators. Ecology 85:3289-301
114. Moeller DA. 2005. Pollinator community structure and sources of spatial variation in plant-pollinator interactions in Clarkia xantiana ssp. xantiana. Oecologia 142:28-37
115. Momose K. 2004. Plant reproductive interval and population density in aseasonal tropics. Ecol. Res. 19:245-53
116. Moody-Weis JM, Heywood JS. 2001. Pollination limitation to reproductive success in the Missouri evening primrose, Oenothera macrocarpa (Onagraceae). Am. J. Bot. 88: 1615-22
117. Moragues E, Traveset A. 2005. Effect of Carpobrotus spp. on the pollination success of native plant species of the Balearic Islands. Biol. Cons. 122:611-19
118. Morgan MT, Wilson WG. 2005. Self-fertilization and the escape from pollen limitation in variable pollination environments. Evolution 59:1143-48
119. Morgan MT, Wilson WG, Knight TM. 2005. Plant population dynamics, pollinator foraging, and the selection of self-fertilization. Am. Nat. 166:169-183
120. Morris WF. 2003. Which mutualists are most essential?: buffering of plant reproduction against the extinction of pollinators. In The Importance of Species: Perspectives on Expendability and Triage, ed. P Karieva, S Levin, pp. 260-80. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
121. Mothershead K, Marquis RJ. 2000. Fitness impacts of herbivory through indirect effects on plant-pollinator interactions in Oenothera macrocarpa. Ecology 81:30-40
122. Muñoz AA, Arroyo MTK. 2004. Negative impacts of a vertebrate predator on insect pollinator visitation and seed output in Chuquiraga oppositifolia, a high Andean shrub. Oecologia 138:66-73
123. Mustajärvi K, Siikamaki P, Rytkonen S, Lammi A. 2001. Consequences of plant population size and density for plant-pollinator interactions and plant performance. J. Ecol. 89:80-87
124. Neal PR, Dafni A, Giurfa M. 1998. Floral symmetry and its role in plant-pollinator systems: terminology, distribution, and hypotheses. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29:345-73
125. Neiland MRM, Wilcock CC. 1998. Fruit set. nectar reward, and rarity in the Orchidaceae. Am. J. Bot. 85:1657-71
126. Niesenbaum RA. 1993. Light or pollen: seasonal limitations on female reproductive success in the understory shrub Lindera benzoin. J. Ecol. 81:315-23
127. O'Toole C. 1993. Diversity of native bees and agroecosystems. In Hymenoptera and Biodiversity, 3rd Quadrennial Symp. Int. Soc. Hymenopterists, London, ed. J LaSalle ID Gauld. pp. 69-106. London: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau Int.
128. Pagel MD, Harvey PH. 1988. Recent developments in the analysis of comparative data. Q. Rev. Biol. 63:413-40
129. Paini DR. 2004. Impact of the introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) on native bees: a review. Aust. Ecol. 29:399-407
130. Pannell JR, Barrett SCH. 1998. Baker's law revisited: reproductive assurance in a metapopulation. Evolution 52:657-68
131. Parker IM. 1997. Pollinator limitation of Cytisus scoparius (Scotch broom), an invasive exotic shrub. Ecology 78:1457-70
132. Parker MA. 1987. Pathogen impact on sexual vs. asexual reproductive success in Arisaema triphyllum. Am. J. Bot. 74:1758-63
133. Paton DC. 1993. Honeybees Apis mellifera in the Australian environment. Does Apis mellifera disrupt or benefit native biota? Bio-Science 43:95-103
134. Porcher E, Lande R. 2005. The evolution of self-fertilisation and inbreeding depression under pollen discounting and pollen limitation. J. Evol. Biol. 18:497-508
135. Primack RB, Hall P. 1990. Costs of reproduction in the pink lady's slipper orchid: a 4-year experimental study. Am. Nat. 136:638-55
136. Primack RB, Stacy E. 1998. Cost of reproduction in the pink lady's slipper orchid, (Cypripedium acaule, Orchidaceae): an eleven-year experimental study of three populations. Am. J. Bot. 85:1672-79
137. Rambuda TD, Johnson SD. 2004. Breeding systems of invasive alien plants in South Africa: does Baker's rule apply? Divers. Distrib. 10:409-16
138. Ramsey M. 1995. Causes and consequences of seasonal variation in pollen limitation of seed production in Blandfordia grandiflora (Liliaceae). Oikos 73:49-58
139. Rathcke BJ. 1983. Competition and facilitation among plants for pollination. In Pollination Biology, ed. L Real. pp. 305-29. New York: Academic
140. Rathcke BJ. 2003. Floral longevity and reproductive assurance: seasonal patterns and an experimental test with Kalmia latifolia (Ericaceae). Am. J. Bot. 90:1328-32
141. Regal PJ. 1982. Pullination by wind and animals: ecology of geographic patterns. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 13:497-524
142. Richardson DM, Allsop N, D'Antonio CM, Milton SJ, Rejmánek M. 2000. Plant invasions: the role of mutualism. Biol. Rev. 75:65-93
143. Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Michener CD. 2004. Economic value of tropical forest to coffee production. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:12579-82
144. Ronsheim ML, Bever JD. 2000. Genetic variation and evolutionary trade-offs for sexual and asexual reproductive modes in Allium vineale (Liliaceae). Am. J. Bot. 87:1769-77
145. Rosenberg MS, Adams DC, Gurevitch J. 2000. MetaWin statistical software for meta-analysis version 2. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Assoc. Inc.
146. Santrandreu M, Lloret F. 1999. Effect of flowering phenology and habitat on pollen limitation in Erica multiflora. Can. J. Bot. 77:734-43
147. Sargent RD. 2004. Floral symmetry affects speciation rates in angiosperms. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 271:603-8
148. SAS Institute. 2001. Version 8.2. Cary, NC: SAS Inst. Inc.
149. Schaal BA. 1978. Density dependent foraging on Liatris pycnostachya. Evolution 32:452-54
150. Shykoff JA, Kolokotronis S-O, Collin CL, Lopez-Villavicencio M. 2003. Effects of male sterility on reproductive traits in gynodioecious plants: a meta-analysis. Oecologia 135:1-9
151. Sih A, Baltus MS. 1987. Patch size, pollinator behavior, and pollinator limitation in Catnip. Ecology 68:1679-90
152. Steets JA, Ashman T-L. 2004. Herbivory alters the expression of a mixed-mating system. Am. J. Bot. 91:1046-51
153. Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T. 1999. Effects of habitat isolation on pollinator communities and seed set. Oecologia 121:432-40
154. Steinbachs JE, Holsinger KE. 2002. S-RNase-mediated gametophytic self-incompatibility is ancestral in eudicots. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19:825-29
155. Stephenson AG. 1981. Flower and fruit abortion: proximate causes and ultimate functions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 12:253-79
156. Strauss SY, Conner JK, Rush SL. 1996. Foliar herbivory affects floral characters and plant attractiveness to pollinators: implications for male and female plant fitness. Am. Nat. 147:1098-1107
157. Sugden EA, Pyke GH. 1991. Effects of honey bees on colonies of Exoneura asimillima, an Australian native bee. Aust. J. Ecol. 16:171-81
158. Sutherland S. 1986. Patterns of fruit-set: what controls fruit-flower ratios in plants? Evolution 40:117-28
159. Suttle KB. 2003. Pollinators as mediators of top-down effects on plants. Ecol. Lett. 6:688-94
160. Thomson JD. 1989. Deployment of ovules and pollen among flowers within inflorescences. Evol. Trends Plants 3:65-68
161. Thomson JD. 2001. Using pollination deficits to infer pollinator declines: Can theory guide us? Cons. Ecol. 5(1):6. URL: http:// www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art6/
162. Townsend PA, Levey DJ. 2005. An experimental test of whether habitat corridors affect pollen transfer. Ecology 86:466-75
163. Valido A, Dupond YL, Hansen DM. 2002. Native birds and insects, and introduced honey bees visiting Echium wildpretii (Boraginaceae) in the Canary Islands. Acta Oecol. 23:413-19
164. Vallejo-Marín M, Uyenoyama MK. 2004. On the evolutionary costs of self-incompatibility: incomplete reproductive compensation due to pollen limitation. Evolution 58:1924-35
165. Vamosi JC, Otto SP. 2002. When looks can kill: the evolution of sexually dimorphic floral display and the extinction of dioecious plants. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 269:1187-94
166. Vamosi JC, Vamosi SM. 2005a. Present day risk of extinction may exacerbate the lower species richness of dioecious clades. Divers. Distrib. 11:25-32
167. Vamosi JC, Vamosi SM. 2005b. Endless tests: guidelines for analyzing non-nested sister-group comparisons. Evol. Ecol. Res. 7:567-79
168. Vàzquez DP, Simberloff D. 2004. Indirect effects of an introduced ungulate on pollination and plant reproduction. Ecol. Monogr. 74:281-308
169. Verdu M, Traveset A. 2004. Bridging meta-analysis and the comparative method: a test of seed size on germination after frugivore's gut passage. Oecologia 138:414-18
170. Waites AR, Ågren J. 2004. Pollinator visitation, stigmatic pollen loads and among-population variation in seed set in Lythrum salicaria. J. Ecol. 92:512-26
171. Ward M, Johnson SD. 2005. Pollen limitation and demographic structure in small fragmented populations of Brunsvigia radulosa (Amaryllidaceae). Oikos 108:253-62
172. Waser NM. 1983. The adaptive nature of floral traits: ideas and evidence. In Pollination Biology, ed. L Real, pp. 242-85. Orlando, FL: Academic
173. Waser NM, Chittka L, Price MV, Williams NM, Ollerton J. 1996. Generalization in pollination systems and why it matters. Ecology 77:1043-60
174. Webb C, Ackerly D, Kembel S. 2004. Phylocom: Software for the analysis of community phylogenetic structure and character evolution. Version 3.22. http://www. phylodiversity.net/phylocom/
175. Webb CO, Ackerly DD, McPeek MA, Donoghue MJ. 2002. Phylogenies and community ecology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33: 475-505
176. Webb CO, Donoghue MJ. 2005. Phylomatic: tree assembly for applied phylogenetics. Mol. Ecol. Notes 5:181-83
177. Whitehead DR. 1983. Wind pollination: some ecological and evolutionary perspectives. In Pollination Biology, ed. L Real, pp. 97-108. New York: Academic
178. Widén B. 1991. Phenotypic selection on flowering phenology in Senecio integrifolius, a perennial herb. Oikos 61:205-15
179. Wilcock C, Neiland R. 2002. Pollination failure in plants: why it happens and when it matters. Trends Plant Sci. 7:270-77
180. Wilcock CC, Neiland MRM. 1998. Reproductive characters as priority indicators for rare plant conservation. In Planta Europa: Proceedings of the Second European Conference on the Conservation of Wild Plants, ed. H Synge, J Akeroyd, pp. 221-30. Uppsala, Sweden/London: UK: Swedish Threatened Plants Unit & Plantlife
181. Willson MF, Burley N. 1983. Mate Choice in Plants. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
182. Wilson P, Thomson JD, Stanton ML. 1994. Beyond floral Batemania: gender biases in selection for pollination success. Am. Nat. 143:283-96
183. Wilson WG, Harder LD. 2003. Reproductive uncertainty and the relative competitiveness of simultaneous hermaphroditism versus dioecy. Am. Nat. 162:220-41
184. Wolf AT, Harrison SP. 2001. Effects of habitat size and patch isolation on reproductive success of the serpentine morning glory. Cons. Biol. 15:111-21
185. Wolf DE, Takebayashi N. 2004. Pollen limitation and the evolution of androdioecy from dioecy. Am. Nat. 163:122-37
186. Wolfe BE, Husband BC, Klironomos JN. 2005. Effects of a belowground mutualism on an aboveground mutualism. Ecol. Lett. 8:218-23
187. Young HJ, Young TP. 1992. Alternative outcomes of natural and experimental high pollen loads. Ecology 73:639-47
188. Zhang D-Y, Wang G. 1994. Evolutionarily stable reproductive strategies in sexual organisms: an integrated approach to life-history evolution and sex allocation. Am. Nat. 144:65-75
189. Zimmerman M, Pyke GH. 1988. Reproduction in Polemonium: assessing the factors limiting seed set. Am. Nat. 131:723-38