The sweetest thing. Advances in nectar research

Current Opinion in Plant Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 486-490

  Brandenburg, Anna ^a,b   Dell'Olivo, Alexandre ^a   Bshary, Redouan ^b   Kuhlemeier, Cris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEUCHÂTEL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOSPERM; ANIMAL; FLOWER; GENETICS; HOST PARASITE INTERACTION; INSECT; METABOLISM; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PARASITOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; POLLEN; POLLINATION; REPRODUCTION; RESEARCH; REVIEW;

ANGIOSPERMS; ANIMALS; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; FLOWERS; HOST-PARASITE INTERACTIONS; INSECTS; POLLEN; POLLINATION; REPRODUCTION; RESEARCH;

ANIMALIA; MAGNOLIOPHYTA;

EID: 68149112477     PISSN: 13695266     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pbi.2009.04.002     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Southwick E.E. Photosynthate allocation to floral nectar - a neglected energy investment. Ecology 65 (1984) 1775-1779
2. Pyke G.H. What does it cost a plant to produce floral nectar?. Nature 350 (1991) 58-59
3. Baker H., and Baker I. A brief historical review of the chemistry of floral nectar. In: Bentley B., and Elias T. (Eds). The Biology of Nectaries (1983), Columbia University Press 127-152
4. Liu F., Chen J., Chai J., Zhang X., Bai X., He D., and Roubik D.W. Adaptive functions of defensive plant phenolics and a non-linear bee response to nectar components. Funct Ecol 21 (2007) 96-100
5. Irwin R.E., and Adler L.S. Nectar secondary compounds affect self-pollen transfer: implications for female and male reproduction. Ecology 89 (2008) 2207-2217. Secondary compounds are a common feature in floral nectars. They can repel undesirable floral visitors and control pollen movement patterns of pollinators. High nectar alkaloids causing an increased pollen export can benefit the plant.
6. Kessler D., and Baldwin I.T. Making sense of nectar scents: the effects of nectar secondary metabolites on floral visitors of Nicotiana attenuata. Plant J 49 (2007) 840-854. Secondary metabolites were identified in the headspace and nectar of glasshouse-grown and field-grown Nicotiana attenuata plants. Sixteen compounds were tested for attractiveness and repellence in two pollinator guilds and one nectar robber. Two of the substances can act as 'filters', and encourage or discourage floral visitors.
7. Kessler D., Gase K., and Baldwin I.T. Field experiments with transformed plants reveal the sense of floral scents. Science 321 (2008) 1200-1202. Field assays with transgenic Nicotiana plants lacking the attractive compound benzyl acetone (BA), or repellent nicotine (N) or both were conducted to assess the impact of secondary compounds on pollinator behavior. BA enhances pollinator visits, N reduces drinking time; both are needed to maximize seed set and reproductive success.
8. Hoballah M.E., Gubitz T., Stuurman J., Broger L., Barone M., Mandel T., Dell'Olivo A., Arnold M., and Kuhlemeier C. Single gene-mediated shift in pollinator attraction in Petunia. Plant Cell 19 (2007) 779-790. Transcription factor AN2 regulates anthocyanin production in bee-pollinated Petunia integrifolia, but is inactivated in moth-pollinated P. axillaris. Transgenic introduction of active AN2 into P. axillaris partially restores petal color and causes a shift in pollinator visitation.
9. Wist T.J., and Davis A.R. Floral structure and dynamics of nectar production in Echinacea pallida var. angustifolia (Asteraceae). Int J Plant Sci 169 (2008) 708-722
10. Wist T.J., and Davis A.R. Floral nectar production and nectary anatomy and ultrastructure of Echinacea purpurea (Asteraceae). Ann Bot 97 (2006) 177-193
11. Nepi M., and Stpiczynska M. The complexity of nectar: secretion and resorption dynamically regulate nectar features. Naturwissenschaften 95 (2008) 177-184
12. Baum S.F., Eshed Y., and Bowman J.L. The Arabidopsis nectary is an ABC-independent floral structure. Development 128 (2001) 4657-4667
13. De la Barrera E., and Nobel P.S. Nectar: properties, floral aspects, and speculations on origin. Trends Plant Sci 9 (2004) 65-69
14. Cawoy V., Kinet J.M., and Jacquemart A.L. Morphology of nectaries and biology of nectar production in the distylous species Fagopyrum esculentum. Ann Bot 102 (2008) 675-684
15. Ren G., Healy R.A., Klyne A.M., Horner H.T., James M.G., and Thornburg R.W. Transient starch metabolism in ornamental tobacco floral nectaries regulates nectar composition and release. Plant Sci 173 (2007) 277-290
16. Ren G., Healy R.A., Horner H.T., Martha G.J., and Thornburg R.W. Expression of starch metabolic genes in the developing nectaries of ornamental tobacco plants. Plant Sci 173 (2007) 621-637
17. Lüttge U. Über die Zusammensetzung des Nektars und den Mechanismus seiner Sekretion. I. Planta 56 (1961) 189-212
18. Wenzler M., Holscher D., Oerther T., and Schneider B. Nectar formation and floral nectary anatomy of Anigozanthos flavidus: a combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy study. J Exp Bot 59 (2008) 3425-3434. NMR techniques were used to investigate the composition of nectar sugars. A deviation from the expected 1:1 ratio of the hexoses glucose and fructose can be explained by prior cycling of sucrose through complex biochemical pathways before secreting into floral nectar.
19. Herrera C.M., Garcia I.M., and Perez R. Invisible floral larcenies: microbial communities degrade floral nectar of bumble bee-pollinated plants. Ecology 89 (2008) 2369-2376
20. Carter C., and Thornburg R.W. Is the nectar redox cycle a floral defense against microbial attack?. Trends Plant Sci 9 (2004) 320-324
21. Raguso R.A. Start making scents: the challenge of integrating chemistry into pollination ecology. Entomol Exp Appl 128 (2008) 196-207
22. Tanaka Y., Sasaki N., and Ohmiya A. Biosynthesis of plant pigments: anthocyanins, betalains and carotenoids. Plant J 54 (2008) 733-749
23. 2 on nectar foraging by Manduca sexta. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105 (2008) 4565-4570
24. Chalcoff V.R., Aizen M.A., and Galett L. Sugar preferences of the green-backed firecrown hummingbird (Sephanoides sephaniodes): a field experiment. Auk 125 (2008) 60-66
25. Lotz C.N., and Schondube J.E. Sugar preferences in nectar- and fruit-eating birds: behavioral patterns and physiological causes. Biotropica 38 (2006) 3-15
26. Kromer T., Kessler M., Lohaus G., and Schmidt-Lebuhn A.N. Nectar sugar composition and concentration in relation to pollination syndromes in Bromeliaceae. Plant Biol 10 (2008) 502-511
27. Wolff D. Nectar sugar composition and volumes of 47 species of gentianales from a southern Ecuadorian montane forest. Ann Bot 97 (2006) 767-777
28. Johnson S.D., and Nicolson S.W. Evolutionary associations between nectar properties and specificity in bird pollination systems. Biol Lett 4 (2008) 49-52
29. Fleming P.A., Bakken B.H., Lotz C.N., and Nicolson S.W. Concentration and temperature effects on sugar intake and preferences in a sunbird and a hummingbird. Funct Ecol 18 (2004) 223-232
30. Fleming P.A., Xie S., Napier K., McWhorter T.J., and Nicolson S.W. Nectar concentration affects sugar preferences in two Australian honeyeaters and a lorikeet. Funct Ecol 22 (2008) 599-605
31. Schiestl F.P. On the success of a swindle: pollination by deception in orchids. Naturwissenschaften 92 (2005) 255-264
32. Jersakova J., Johnson S.D., and Kindlmann P. Mechanisms and evolution of deceptive pollination in orchids. Biol Rev 81 (2006) 219-235
33. Schluter P.M., and Schiestl F.P. Molecular mechanisms of floral mimicry in orchids. Trends Plant Sci 13 (2008) 228-235
34. Vereecken N.J., and Schiestl F.P. The evolution of imperfect floral mimicry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105 (2008) 7484-7488. Orchids fool male bees by emitting the female bees sex pheromones. Both female bees and orchids produce the same compounds to attract mating partners, but in different relative proportions. Male bees significantly prefer orchids to females, probably due to their sensory preference of 'novel' signals.
35. Peter C.I., and Johnson S.D. Mimics and magnets: the importance of color and ecological facilitation in floral deception. Ecology 89 (2008) 1583-1595. The close resemblance to the model species often explains the success of mimicking food deceptive orchids. Using a bee vision model, the spectral reflectance of the petals was analyzed. The results indicate that bees are not able to distinguish between mimic and model.
36. Jersakova J., and Johnson S.D. Lack of floral nectar reduces self-pollination in a fly-pollinated orchid. Oecologia 147 (2006) 60-68
37. Jersakova J. Do nectar manipulation studies support the cross-pollination hypothesis?. S Afr J Bot 74 (2008) 369-1369
38. Anderson B., and Johnson S.D. The effects of floral mimics and models on each others' fitness. Proc Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 273 (2006) 969-974
39. Anderson B., and Johnson S.D. The geographical mosaic of coevolution in a plant-pollinator mutualism. Evolution 62 (2008) 220-225
40. Jersakova J., Johnson S.D., Kindlmann P., and Pupin A.C. Effect of nectar supplementation on male and female components of pollination success in the deceptive orchid Dactylorhiza sambucina. Acta Oecol-Int J Ecol 33 (2008) 300-306. Nectar supplementation had an overall positive effect on reproductive success of deceptive orchids, regardless of petal color. It is assumed that a mutation resulting in nectar production (as observed in other orchid species) might not have occurred because enhanced nectar volumes can cause inbreeding and involve costs.
41. Leiss K.A., Vrieling K., and Klinkhamer P.G.L. Heritability of nectar production in Echium vulgare. Heredity 92 (2004) 446-451
42. Herrera C.M., Perez R., and Alonso C. Extreme intraplant variation in nectar sugar composition in an insect-pollinated perennial herb. Am J Bot 93 (2006) 575-581
43. Goulson D., Cruise J.L., Sparrow K.R., Harris A.J., Park K.J., Tinsley M.C., and Gilburn A.S. Choosing rewarding flowers; perceptual limitations and innate preferences influence decision making in bumblebees and honeybees. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61 (2007) 1523-1529
44. Canto A., Perez R., Medrano M., Castellanos M.C., and Herrera C.M. Intra-plant variation in nectar sugar composition in two Aquilegia species (Ranunculaceae): contrasting patterns under field and glasshouse conditions. Ann Bot 99 (2007) 653-660
45. Carlson J.E. Hummingbird responses to gender-biased nectar production: are nectar biases maintained by natural or sexual selection?. Proc Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 275 (2008) 1717-1726
46. Smith S.D., Ane C., and Baum D.A. The role of pollinator shifts in the floral diversification of iochroma (Solanaceae). Evolution 62 (2008) 793-806
47. Martins D.J., and Johnson S.D. Hawkmoth pollination of aerangoid orchids in Kenya, with special reference to nectar sugar concentration gradients in the floral spurs. Am J Bot 94 (2007) 650-659
48. Stuurman J., Hoballah M.E., Broger L., Moore J., Basten C., and Kuhlemeier C. Dissection of floral pollination syndromes in Petunia. Genetics 168 (2004) 1585-1599
49. Galliot C., Hoballah M.E., Kuhlemeier C., and Stuurman J. Genetics of flower size and nectar volume in Petunia pollination syndromes. Planta 225 (2006) 203-212. The genetic architecture of differences in floral size and nectar volume are studied in two closely related Petunia species. An AFLP-based QTL map was established to define the genomic regions explaining for phenotypical variation. QTLs with moderate and small effects underlying nectar and size suggest the polygenic nature of these floral traits.
50. Bradshaw H.D., Wilbert S.M., Otto K.G., and Schemske D.W. Genetic-mapping of floral traits associated with reproductive isolation in monkeyflowers (Mimulus). Nature 376 (1995) 762-765