Do ambush predators prefer rewarding or non-rewarding orchid inflorescences?

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 92, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 763-771

  Roberts, David L ^a   Bateman, Richard M ^a  

^a ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Anacamptis; Crab spider; Dactylorhiza; Floral predator; Gymnadenia; Nectar; Orchidaceae; Tritrophic interaction

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; COEXISTENCE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FLORAL TRAIT; MONOCOTYLEDON; NECTAR; POLLINATION; PREDATION; SPIDER; TRITROPHIC INTERACTION;

ASTON CLINTON; BROMLEY; BUCKINGHAMSHIRE; DOWNE; ENGLAND; EURASIA; EUROPE; LONDON [ENGLAND]; PRINCES RISBOROUGH; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

ANACAMPTIS; ANACAMPTIS PYRAMIDALIS; ARANEAE; DACTYLORHIZA; DACTYLORHIZA FUCHSII; DECAPODA (CRUSTACEA); GYMNADENIA; GYMNADENIA CONOPSEA; ORCHIDACEAE; THOMISIDAE;

EID: 36849043744     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: 10958312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00938.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Ackerman JD. 1984. Pollination of tropical and temperate orchids. In : Tan KW, ed. Proceedings of the 11th World Orchid Conference. Miami, FL : American Orchid Society, 98 101.
2. Arditti J. 1992. Fundamentals of orchid biology. New York, NY : Wiley.
3. Bateman RM. in press. ×Dactylodenia Garay & H.R. Sweet. In : Stace CA, ed. Hybridization and the flora of the British Isles, 2nd edn. London : Botanical Society of the British Isles.
4. Bateman RM, Hollingsworth PM, Preston J, Luo Y-B, Pridgeon AM, Chase MW. 2003. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution of Orchidinae and selected Habenariinae (Orchidaceae). Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 142 : 1 40.
5. Bateman RM, Rudall PJ. 2006. Evolutionary and morphometric implications of morphological variation among flowers within an inflorescence: a case-study using European orchids. Annals of Botany 98 : 975 993.
6. Braithwaite ME, Ellis RW, Preston CD. 2006. Change in the British flora 1987-2004. London : Botanical Society of the British Isles.
7. van der Cingel NA. 1995. An atlas of orchid pollination: European orchids. Rotterdam : Balkema.
8. Cozzolino S, Widmer A. 2005. Orchid diversity: an evolutionary consequence of deception? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20 : 487 494.
9. Darwin C. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life, 1st edn. London : Murray.
10. Darwin C. 1862. On the various contrivances by which British and foreign orchids are fertilised by insects, and on the good effects of intercrossing, 1st edn. London : Murray.
11. Dressler RL. 1993. Phylogeny and classification of the orchid family. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
12. Dukas R. 2001. Effects of perceived danger on flower choice by bees. Ecology Letters 4 : 327 333.
13. Dukas R, Morse DH. 2003. Crab spiders affect flower visitation by bees. Oikos 101 : 157 163.
14. Farrington OS, Bateman RM. 1989. Patterns of variation in bigeneric orchid hybrids: British X Dactylogymnadenia. American Journal of Botany 76 (Suppl. 241.
15. Ferdy J-B, Gouyon P-H, Moret J, Godelle B. 1998. Pollinator behavior and deceptive pollination: learning process and floral evolution. American Naturalist 152 : 696 705.
16. Heiling AM, Herberstein ME, Chittka L. 2003. Crab-spiders manipulate flower signals. Nature 421 : 334.
17. Jersáková J, Johnson SD, Kindlmann P. 2006. Mechanisms and evolution of deceptive pollination in orchids. Biological Reviews 81 : 219 235.
18. Jersáková J, Kindlmann P. 2004. Reproductive success and sex variation in nectarless and rewarding orchids. International Journal of Plant Sciences 165 : 779 785.
19. Lang DC. 2004. Britain's orchids. Basing : WildGuides.
20. Morse DH. 1993. Choosing hunting sites with little information: patch choice responses of crab spiders to distances. Behavioural Ecology 4 : 61 65.
21. Morse DH. 2000a. The role of experience in determining patch-use by adult crab spiders. Behaviour 137 : 265 278.
22. Morse DH. 2000b. Flower choice by naïve young crab spiders and the effect of subsequent experience. Animal Behaviour 59 : 943 951.
23. Morse DH, Fritz RS. 1982. Experimental and observational studies of patch choice at different scales by the crab spider Misumena vatia. Ecology 63 : 172 182.
24. Neiland MRM, Wilcock CC. 1998. Fruit set, nectar reward, and rarity in the Orchidaceae. American Journal of Botany 85 : 1657 1671.
25. Nilsson LA. 1992. Orchid pollination biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 7 : 255 259.
26. van der Pijl L, Dodson CH. 1966. Orchid flowers: their pollination and evolution. Coral Gables, FL : University of Miami.
27. Pollard SD, Beck MW, Dodson GN. 1995. Why do male crab spiders drink nectar? Animal Behaviour 49 : 1443 1448.
28. Proctor M, Yeo P, Lack A. 1996. The natural history of pollination. London : Harper Collins.
29. Roberts DL. 2003. Pollination biology: the role of sexual reproduction in orchid conservation. In : Dixon KW, Barrett RL, Cribb P, eds. Orchid conservation. Kota Kinabalu : Natural History Publications, 113 136.
30. Robertson IC, Maguire DK. 2005. Crab spiders deter insect visitations to slickspot peppergrass flowers. Oikos 109 : 577 582.
31. Romero GQ, Vasconcellos-Neto J. 2004. Foraging by the flower-dwelling spider, Misumenops argenteus (Thomisidae), at high prey density sites. Journal of Natural History 38 : 1287 1296.
32. de Souza ALT. 2005. Foliage density of branches and distribution of plant-dwelling spiders. Biotropica 37 : 416 420.
33. Tremblay RL. 1992. Trends in the pollination ecology of the Orchidaceae: evolution and systematics. Canadian Journal of Botany 70 : 642 650.
34. Tremblay RL, Ackerman JD, Zimmerman JK, Calvo RN. 2005. Variation in sexual reproduction in orchids and its evolutionary consequences: a spasmodic journey to diversification. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 84 : 1 54.