Can species naming drive scientific attention? A perspective from plant-feeding arthropods.

How do researchers choose their study species? Some choices are based on ecological or economic importance, some on ease of study, some on tradition-but could the name of a species influence researcher decisions? We asked whether phytophagous arthropod species named after their host plants were more likely to be assayed for host-associated genetic differentiation (or 'HAD'; the evolution of cryptic, genetically isolated host specialists within an apparently more generalist lineage). We chose 30 arthropod species (from a Google Scholar search) for which a HAD hypothesis has been tested. We traced the etymologies of species names in the 30 corresponding genera, and asked whether HAD tests were more frequent among species whose etymologies were based on host-plant names (e.g. Eurosta solidaginis, which attacks Solidago) versus those with other etymologies (e.g. Eurosta fenestrata, from Latin fenestra, 'window'). Species with host-derived etymologies were more likely to feature in studies of HAD than those with other etymologies. We speculate that the etymology of a scientific name can draw a researcher's attention to aspects of life-history and thus influence the direction of our scientific gaze.

Pollinators exert natural selection on flower size and floral display in Penstemon digitalis.

• A major gap in our understanding of floral evolution, especially micro-evolutionary processes, is the role of pollinators in generating patterns of natural selection on floral traits. Here we explicitly tested the role of pollinators in selecting floral traits in a herbaceous perennial, Penstemon digitalis. • We manipulated the effect of pollinators on fitness through hand pollinations and compared phenotypic selection in open- and hand-pollinated plants. • Despite the lack of pollen limitation in our population, pollinators mediated selection on floral size and floral display. Hand pollinations removed directional selection for larger flowers and stabilizing selection on flower number, suggesting that pollinators were the agents of selection on both of these traits. • We reviewed studies that measured natural selection on floral traits by biotic agents and generally found stronger signatures of selection imposed by pollinators than by herbivores and co-flowering plant species.