ABSTRACT
Tolerance of foliar damage is widely recognized as an effective defense against herbivores and pathogens. However, tolerance of the impacts of antagonists on pollination success is less well understood. Here, we extend the framework of tolerance to foliar damage to understand how plants mitigate the pollination and fitness costs of floral larceny (i.e., the consumption of floral nectar often without pollination). We focused on two mechanisms: high nectar rewards per flower to feed all floral visitors and high flower production to compensate for reproductive losses under reduced pollination and seed set. We compared the efficacy of these mechanisms in two plant species: Polemonium viscosum and Ipomopsis aggregata. In Polemonium, ants acting as larcenists reduce nectar accumulation but do not completely empty flowers. When nectar reserves were augmented, ant consumption increased, negating the efficacy of this putative tolerance mechanism. Similarly, in Ipomopsis, nectar addition had little effect on tolerance to larceny by bumble bees, perhaps because residual intact flowers do not have enough nectar to compensate for lost rewards. Flower production in both species mitigated some of the negative impacts of larceny on seed set. In Polemonium, flower number was not plastic in response to larceny, but large inflorescences enhanced female fitness only when larcenists were present, suggesting that "surplus" flowers in large inflorescences can function to replace reproductive losses due to larceny. In Ipomopsis, high rates of larceny induced flower production, but the fecundity benefits of making more flowers declined inversely to larcenist intensity. Overall, our results suggest (1) that tolerance to floral larceny involves "banking" extra flowers to replace lost reproduction rather than maintaining pollination of ones with larceny, and (2) that the efficacy of flower production as a tolerance mechanism varies inversely to larceny rate.
ABSTRACT
Animals that consume plant parts or rewards but provide no services in return are likely to have significant impacts on the reproductive success of their host plants. The effects of multiple antagonists to plant reproduction may not be predictable from studying their individual effects in isolation. If consumer behaviors are contingent on each other, such interactions may limit the ability of the host to evolve in response to any one enemy. Here, we asked whether nectar robbing by a bumblebee (Bombus occidentalis) altered the likelihood of pre-dispersal seed predation by a fly (Hylemya sp.) on a shared host plant, Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae). We estimated the fitness consequences of the combined interactions using experimental manipulations of nectar robbing within and among sites. Within sites, nectar robbing reduced the percentage of fruits destroyed by Hylemya. However, the negative effects of robbing on seed production outweighed any advantages associated with decreased seed predation in robbed plants. We found similar trends among sites when we manipulated robbing to all plants within a local population, although the results were not statistically significant. Taken together, our results suggest that seed predation is not independent of nectar robbing. Thus, accounting for the interactions among species is crucial to predicting their ecological effects and plant evolutionary response.
