An official website of the United States government
Abstract BackgroundPollinators impose strong selection on floral traits, but other abiotic and biotic agents also drive the evolution of floral traits and influence plant reproduction. Global change is expected to have widespread effects on biotic and abiotic systems, resulting in novel selection on floral traits in future conditions. ScopeGlobal change has depressed pollinator abundance and altered abiotic conditions, thereby exposing flowering plant species to novel suites of selective pressures. Here, we consider how biotic and abiotic factors interact to shape the expression and evolution of floral characteristics (the targets of selection), including floral size, colour, physiology, reward quantity and quality, and longevity, amongst other traits. We examine cases in which selection imposed by climatic factors conflicts with pollinator-mediated selection. Additionally, we explore how floral traits respond to environmental changes through phenotypic plasticity and how that can alter plant fecundity. Throughout this review, we evaluate how global change might shift the expression and evolution of floral phenotypes. ConclusionsFloral traits evolve in response to multiple interacting agents of selection. Different agents can sometimes exert conflicting selection. For example, pollinators often prefer large flowers, but drought stress can favour the evolution of smaller flowers, and the size of floral organs can evolve as a trade-off between selection mediated by these opposing actors. Nevertheless, few studies have manipulated abiotic and biotic agents of selection factorially to disentangle their relative strengths and directions of selection. The literature has more often evaluated plastic responses of floral traits to stressors than it has considered how abiotic factors alter selection on these traits. Global change will likely alter the selective landscape through changes in the abundance and community composition of mutualists and antagonists and novel abiotic conditions. We encourage future work to consider the effects of abiotic and biotic agents of selection on floral evolution, which will enable more robust predictions about floral evolution and plant reproduction as global change progresses.
more »
« less
The role of sensory drive in floral evolution
Summary Sensory drive theory posits that the evolution of communication signals is shaped by the sensory systems of receivers and the habitat conditions under which signals are received. It has inspired an enormous body of research, advancing our understanding of signal evolution and speciation in animals. In plants, the extreme diversification of floral signals has fascinated biologists for over a century. While processes involved in sensory drive probably play out in plant–pollinator communication, the theory has not been formally synthesized in this context. However, it has untapped potential to explain mechanisms underlying variation in pollinator preferences across populations, and how environmental conditions impact floral signal transmission and perception. Here I develop a framework of sensory drive for plant–pollinator interactions, identifying similarities and differences from its original conception. I then summarize studies that shed light on how the primary processes of sensory drive – habitat transmission, perceptual tuning, and signal matching – apply to the evolution of floral color and scent. Throughout, I propose research avenues and approaches to assess how sensory drive shapes floral diversity. This framework will be important for explaining patterns of extant floral diversity and examining how altered signaling conditions under global change will impact the evolutionary trajectory of floral traits.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1754590
- PAR ID:
- 10420331
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- New Phytologist
- Volume:
- 227
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0028-646X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 1012-1024
- Size(s):
- p. 1012-1024
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Infectious disease is a major driver of biodiversity loss, but how disease threatens pollinator communities remains poorly understood. Here, we review the plant–pollinator–pathogen literature to identify mechanisms by which plant and pollinator traits and community composition influence pathogen transmission and assess consequences of transmission on plant and pollinator fitness. We find that plant and pollinator traits that increase floral contact can amplify transmission, but community-level factors such as plant and pollinator abundance are often correlated and can counteract one another. Although disease reduces pollinator fitness in some species, little research has assessed cascading effects on pollination, and taxonomic representation outside of honey bees and bumble bees remains poor. Major open challenges include (a) disentangling correlations between plant and pollinator abundance to understand how community composition impacts pathogen transmission and (b) distinguishing when pathogen transmission results in disease. Addressing these issues, as well as expanding taxonomic representation of pollinators, will deepen our understanding of how pathogens impact diverse pollinator communities.more » « less
-
Abstract Habitat for pollinators is declining worldwide, threatening the health of both wild and agricultural ecosystems. Photovoltaic solar energy installation is booming, frequently near agricultural lands, where the land underneath ground-mounted photovoltaic panels is traditionally unused. Some solar developers and agriculturalists in the United States are filling the solar understory with habitat for pollinating insects in efforts to maximize land-use efficiency in agricultural lands. However, the impact of the solar panel canopy on the understory pollinator-plant community is unknown. Here we investigated the effects of solar arrays on plant composition, bloom timing and foraging behavior of pollinators from June to September (after peak bloom) in full shade plots and partial shade plots under solar panels as well as in full sun plots (controls) outside of the solar panels. We found that floral abundance increased and bloom timing was delayed in the partial shade plots, which has the potential to benefit late-season foragers in water-limited ecosystems. Pollinator abundance, diversity, and richness were similar in full sun and partial shade plots, both greater than in full shade. Pollinator-flower visitation rates did not differ among treatments at this scale. This demonstrates that pollinators will use habitat under solar arrays, despite variations in community structure across shade gradients. We anticipate that these findings will inform local farmers and solar developers who manage solar understories, as well as agriculture and pollinator health advocates as they seek land for pollinator habitat restoration in target areas.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundStudies that aim to understand the processes that generate and organize plant diversity in nature have a long history in ecology. Among these, the study of plant–plant interactions that take place indirectly via pollinator choice and floral visitation has been paramount. Current evidence, however, indicates that plants can interact more directly via heterospecific pollen (HP) transfer and that these interactions are ubiquitous and can have strong fitness effects. The intensity of HP interactions can also vary spatially, with important implications for floral evolution and community assembly. ScopeInterest in understanding the role of heterospecific pollen transfer in the diversification and organization of plant communities is rapidly rising. The existence of spatial variation in the intensity of species interactions and their role in shaping patterns of diversity is also well recognized. However, after 40 years of research, the importance of spatial variation in HP transfer intensity and effects remains poorly known, and thus we have ignored its potential in shaping patterns of diversity at local and global scales. Here, I develop a conceptual framework and summarize existing evidence for the ecological and evolutionary consequences of spatial variation in HP transfer interactions and outline future directions in this field. ConclusionsThe drivers of variation in HP transfer discussed here illustrate the high potential for geographic variation in HP intensity and its effects, as well as in the evolutionary responses to HP receipt. So far, the study of pollinator-mediated plant–plant interactions has been almost entirely dominated by studies of pre-pollination interactions even though their outcomes can be influenced by plant–plant interactions that take place on the stigma. It is hence critical that we fully evaluate the consequences and context-dependency of HP transfer interactions in order to gain a more complete understanding of the role that plant–pollinator interactions play in generating and organizing plant biodiversity.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Flowers at times host abundant and specialized communities of bacteria and fungi that influence floral phenotypes and interactions with pollinators. Ecological processes drive variation in microbial abundance and composition at multiple scales, including among plant species, among flower tissues, and among flowers on the same plant. Variation in microbial effects on floral phenotype suggests that microbial metabolites could cue the presence or quality of rewards for pollinators, but most plants are unlikely to rely on microbes for pollinator attraction or reproduction. From a microbial perspective, flowers offer opportunities to disperse between habitats, but microbial species differ in requirements for and benefits received from such dispersal. The extent to which floral microbes shape the evolution of floral traits, influence fitness of floral visitors, and respond to anthropogenic change is unclear. A deeper understanding of these phenomena could illuminate the ecological and evolutionary importance of floral microbiomes and their role in the conservation of plant–pollinator interactions.more » « less
