Translator Disclaimer
1 January 2007 VARIATION IN POLLINATOR PREFERENCE BETWEEN TWO IPOMOPSIS CONTACT SITES THAT DIFFER IN HYBRIDIZATION RATE
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Pollinator-mediated reproductive isolation is often a principal factor in determining the rate of hybridization between plant species. Pollinator preference and constancy can reduce interspecific pollen transfer between otherwise interfertile, coflowering species. The importance of this ethological isolation can be assessed by comparing the strength of preference and constancy of pollinators in contact sites that differ in the frequency of hybrid individuals. We observed visitation by hummingbirds and hawkmoths in natural single-species patches and artificial mixed-species arrays in two Ipomopsis aggregata/I. tenuituba contact sites—one with few hybrids, and one in which hybrids are abundant. Pollinator preference and constancy were stronger at the low-frequency hybrid site, especially for hawkmoths (Hyles lineata). Hawkmoths at the low-frequency hybrid site showed significant preference and constancy for I. tenuituba, while at the high-frequency site hawkmoths visited both species equally. One hypothesis that might explain these differences in hawkmoth foraging is that warmer nights at the low-frequency hybrid site allow for nocturnal foraging where the light-colored corollas of I. tenuituba have a visibility advantage. These differences in hawkmoth behavior might in turn affect hummingbirds differently at the two sites, through changes in nectar resources, leading to greater pollinator-mediated isolation at the low-frequency hybrid site. Our results suggest that differences in pollinator behaviors between sites can have both direct and indirect effects on hybridization rates between plant species.

George Aldridge and Diane R. Campbell "VARIATION IN POLLINATOR PREFERENCE BETWEEN TWO IPOMOPSIS CONTACT SITES THAT DIFFER IN HYBRIDIZATION RATE," Evolution 61(1), 99-110, (1 January 2007). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00008.x
Received: 15 May 2006; Accepted: 2 October 2006; Published: 1 January 2007
JOURNAL ARTICLE
12 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top