View Item 

Show simple item record

Light availability influences the intensity of nectar robbery and its effects on reproduction in a tropical shrub via multiple pathways
dc.contributor.authorFitch, Gordon
dc.contributor.authorVandermeer, John H.
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-05T18:46:22Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_12_MONTHS
dc.date.available2021-01-05T18:46:22Z
dc.date.issued2020-12
dc.identifier.citationFitch, Gordon; Vandermeer, John H. (2020). "Light availability influences the intensity of nectar robbery and its effects on reproduction in a tropical shrub via multiple pathways." American Journal of Botany (12): 1635-1644.
dc.identifier.issn0002-9122
dc.identifier.issn1537-2197
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/163865
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.publisherCalifornia Academy of Sciences
dc.subject.otherpollination
dc.subject.otherreciprocal translocation
dc.subject.otherAcanthaceae
dc.subject.otherclonal transgenerational effects
dc.subject.otherfloral antagonists
dc.subject.otherindirect effects
dc.subject.othermaternal effects
dc.subject.otherOdontonema cuspidatum
dc.titleLight availability influences the intensity of nectar robbery and its effects on reproduction in a tropical shrub via multiple pathways
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelBiology
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelBotany
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScience
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163865/1/ajb21559_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163865/2/ajb21559.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ajb2.1559
dc.identifier.sourceAmerican Journal of Botany
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMothershead, K., and R. J. Marquis. 2000. Fitness impacts of herbivory through indirect effects on plant‐pollinator interactions in Oenothera macrocarpa. Ecology 81: 30 – 40.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalen, C. 1999. Why do flowers vary? BioScience 49: 631 – 640.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalloway, L. F., and J. R. Etterson. 2007. Transgenerational plasticity is adaptive in the wild. Science 318: 1134 – 1136.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalloway, L. F., and J. R. Etterson. 2009. Plasticity to canopy shade in a monocarpic herb: within‐ and between‐generation effects. New Phytologist 182: 1003 – 1012.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGegear, R. J., R. Burns, and K. A. Swoboda‐Bhattarai. 2017. “Hummingbird” floral traits interact synergistically to discourage visitation by bumble bee foragers. Ecology 98: 489 – 499.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGélvez‐Zúñiga, I., A. L. Teixido, A. C. O. Neves, and G. W. Fernandes. 2018. Floral antagonists counteract pollinator‐mediated selection on attractiveness traits in the hummingbird‐pollinated Collaea cipoensis (Fabaceae). Biotropica 50: 797 – 804.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHeger, T. 2016. Light availability experienced in the field affects ability of following generations to respond to shading in an annual grassland plant. Journal of Ecology 104: 1432 – 1440.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHerrera, C. M. 1995. Floral Biology, Microclimate, and Pollination by Ectothermic Bees in an Early‐Blooming Herb. Ecology 76: 218 – 228.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIrwin, R. E. 2006. The Consequences of Direct versus Indirect Species Interactions to Selection on Traits: Pollination and Nectar Robbing in Ipomopsis aggregata. The American Naturalist 167: 315 – 328.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIrwin, R. E., J. L. Bronstein, J. S. Manson, and L. Richardson. 2010. Nectar robbing: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 41: 271 – 292.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKilkenny, F. F., and L. F. Galloway. 2008. Reproductive success in varying light environments: direct and indirect effects of light on plants and pollinators. Oecologia 155: 247 – 255.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLatzel, V., and J. Klimešová. 2010. Transgenerational plasticity in clonal plants. Evolutionary Ecology 24: 1537 – 1543.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMaloof, J. E., and D. W. Inouye. 2000. Are Nectar Robbers Cheaters or Mutualists? Ecology 81: 2651 – 2661.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcConnaughay, K. D. M., and J. S. Coleman. 1999. Biomass Allocation in Plants: Ontogeny or Optimality? A Test along Three Resource Gradients. Ecology 80: 2581 – 2593.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcDonald, E. P., J. Agrell, and R. L. Lindroth. 1999. CO₂ and Light Effects on Deciduous Trees: Growth, Foliar Chemistry, and Insect Performance. Oecologia 119: 389 – 399.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMünzbergová, Z., and V. Hadincová. 2017. Transgenerational plasticity as an important mechanism affecting response of clonal species to changing climate. Ecology and Evolution 7: 5236 – 5247.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNiesenbaum, R. A. 1993. Light or Pollen‐Seasonal Limitations on Female Reproductive Success in the Understory Shrub Lindera Benzoin. Journal of Ecology 81: 315 – 323.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR Core Team. 2018. R: a language and environment for statistical computing.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoach, D. A., and R. D. Wulff. 1987. Maternal effects in plants. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 18: 209 – 235.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRojas‐Nossa, S. V., J. M. Sánchez, and L. Navarro. 2016. Nectar robbing: a common phenomenon mainly determined by accessibility constraints, nectar volume and density of energy rewards. Oikos 125: 1044 – 1055.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRossiter, M. 1996. Incidence and consequences of inherited environmental effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27: 451 – 476.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchiestl, F. P., and S. D. Johnson. 2013. Pollinator‐mediated evolution of floral signals. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28: 307 – 315.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStreinzer, M., W. Huber, and J. Spaethe. 2016. Body size limits dim‐light foraging activity in stingless bees (Apidae: Meliponini). Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 202: 643 – 655.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSuárez‐Vidal, E., X. López‐Goldar, L. Sampedro, and R. Zas. 2017. Effect of Light Availability on the Interaction between Maritime Pine and the Pine Weevil: Light Drives Insect Feeding Behavior But Also the Defensive Capabilities of the Host. Frontiers in Plant Science 8.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWillmer, P. G. 1991. Constraints on foraging by solitary bees. In L. Goodman and R. C. Fisher [eds.], The behavior and physiology of bees, CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMattila, T., and V. Salonen. 1995. Reproduction of Viola mirabilis in relation to light and nutrient availability. Canadian Journal of Botany 73: 1917 – 1924.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAleixo, K. P., C. Menezes, V. L. Imperatriz Fonseca, and C. I. da Silva. 2017. Seasonal availability of floral resources and ambient temperature shape stingless bee foraging behavior ( Scaptotrigona aff. depilis ). Apidologie 48: 117 – 127.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBates, D., M. Maechler, B. Bolker, and S. Walker. 2015. Fitting Linear Mixed‐Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67: 1 – 48.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBurkle, L. A., R. E. Irwin, and D. A. Newman. 2007. Predicting the effects of nectar robbing on plant reproduction: implications of pollen limitation and plant mating system. American Journal of Botany 94: 1935 – 1943.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCao, G.‐X., B.‐X. Wu, X.‐J. Xu, X. Wang, and C.‐P. Yang. 2017. The effects of local variation in light availability on pollinator visitation, pollen and resource limitation of female reproduction in Hosta ventricosa. Botanical Studies 58: 24.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceColeman, J. S., K. D. M. McConnaughay, and D. D. Ackerly. 1994. Interpreting phenotypic variation in plants. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9: 187 – 191.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceConner, J. K., and S. Rush. 1996. Effects of flower size and number on pollinator visitation to wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum. Oecologia 105: 509 – 516.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCunningham, S. A. 1997. The Effect of Light Environment, Leaf Area, and Stored Carbohydrates on Inflorescence Production by a Rain Forest Understory Palm. Oecologia 111: 36 – 44.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDaniel, T. F. 1995. Part 4: Acanthaceae. Flora of Chiapas. California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDelerue, F., M. Gonzalez, A. Atlan, S. Pellerin, and L. Augusto. 2013. Plasticity of reproductive allocation of a woody species (Ulex europaeus) in response to variation in resource availability. Annals of Forest Science 70: 219 – 228.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDewan, S., P. De Frenne, A. Vanden Broeck, M. Steenackers, K. Vander Mijnsbrugge, and K. Verheyen. 2018. Transgenerational effects in asexually reproduced offspring of Populus. PLoS One 13: e0208591.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDong, B.‐C., T. Fu, F.‐L. Luo, and F.‐H. Yu. 2017. Herbivory‐induced maternal effects on growth and defense traits in the clonal species Alternanthera philoxeroides. Science of The Total Environment 605–606: 114 – 123.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDudt, J. F., and D. J. Shure. 1994. The Influence of Light and Nutrients on Foliar Phenolics and Insect Herbivory. Ecology 75: 86 – 98.
dc.identifier.citedreferencede Figueiredo‐Mecca, G., L. R. Bego, and F. S. do Nascimento. 2013. Foraging behavior of Scaptotrigona depilis (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponini) and its relationship with temporal and abiotic factors. Sociobiology 60: 267 – 282.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFitch, G., and J. H. Vandermeer. 2020a. Changes in partner traits drive variation in plant–nectar robber interactions across habitats. bioRxiv: 2020.01.09.898692 [Preprint].
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFitch, G., and J. H. Vandermeer. 2020b. Data from: Light availability influences the intensity of nectar robbery and its effects on reproduction in a tropical shrub via multiple pathways. Dryad Digital Repository. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.kkwh70s2z.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
ajb21559_am.pdf
Size:
511.4KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
ajb21559.pdf
Size:
583.6KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.