Preferences of pollinators and herbivores in gynodioecious Geranium sylvaticum

67Citations
Citations of this article
79Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

• Background and Aims: For the maintenance of gynodioecy (i.e. the coexistence of female and hermaphroditic plants), females need to compensate for the lack of pollen production through higher seed production or better progeny quality compared to hermaphrodites. In Geranium sylvaticum, females produce more seeds per flower than hermaphrodites. This difference in seed production might be modified by biological interactions with pollinators and herbivores that may favour one sex and thus affect the maintenance of gynodioecy. • Methods: Sexual dimorphism in flower size and flowering phenology, and in attractiveness to pollinators, pre-dispersal seed predators and floral herbivores were examined in natural populations of G. sylvaticum. • Key Results: Pollinators preferred hermaphrodites 25 % more often than females in two of the three study populations, and floral herbivores attacked hermaphrodites 15 % more often than females in two of the six study populations. These preferences might be explained by the larger flower size of hermaphrodites. In contrast, seed predators did not prefer either sex. • Conclusions: The data suggest that pollinator preference does not benefit females, whereas the higher floral herbivory of hermaphrodites might enhance the maintenance of females in G. sylvaticum. Thus, although the data support the view that ecological factors may contribute to the maintenance of gynodioecy, they also suggest that these contributions may vary across populations and that they may function in opposite directions. © The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Annals of Botany Company. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Asikainen, E., & Mutikainen, P. (2005). Preferences of pollinators and herbivores in gynodioecious Geranium sylvaticum. Annals of Botany, 95(5), 879–886. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci094

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free