Nectar robbing by bees on the flowers of Volkameria inermis (Lamiaceae) in Coringa Wildlife Sanctuary, Andhra Pradesh, India

Main Article Content

P. Suvarna Raju
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1713-6943
A.J. Solomon Raju
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0028-2621
C. Venkateswara Reddy
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0990-5562
G. Nagaraju
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0411-098X

Abstract

Floral traits that shape the floral architecture are important to allow or disallow flower visitors to access nectar and effect pollination. Specialization in floral architecture is vulnerable to flower visitors that exploit nectar by robbery without effecting pollination. In Coringa Wildlife Sanctuary in Andhra Pradesh, India, studies on the exploitation of nectar by robbery in plant species with specialized flowers are completely lacking. We carried out a study on the foraging activity of insect foragers and nectar robbing by bees on the specialized nectariferous flowers of an evergreen shrub, Volkameria inermis growing in the landward side of this sanctuary. Field observations indicated that the flowers of this species facilitate legitimate probing only by butterflies and diurnal moths which while seeking nectar effect pollination. However, two bee species Anthophora dizona and Xylocopa pubescens seek nectar illegitimately as primary nectar robbers by making a slit/hole into the corolla tube from outside bypassing the flower front. Additionally, A. dizona gathers pollen legitimately from the stamens which are exposed and placed outside the corolla tube. The stigma is also placed outside the corolla tube but this bee indiscriminately makes attempts to collect pollen from the stigma, as a result of which pollination occurs. Nectar robbing by these bees leads to a reduction in nectar volume in robbed flowers and brings about variability in the standing crop of nectar. As a result, the pollinating butterflies increase the number of nectar foraging visits and shuttle between populations of V. inermis in quest of more nectar to meet their daily metabolic requirements. Such a foraging behavior increases pollination rate in general and cross-pollination in particular, which in turn increases plant fitness in V. inermis. Therefore, the nectar robbing by bees appears to have a positive effect on plant fitness through change in seed set rates.

Article Details

Section
Communications

References

Castellanos, M.C., P. Wilson & J.D. Thomson (2003). Pollen transfer by hummingbirds and bumblebees, and the divergence of pollinator modes in Penstemon. Evolution 57: 2742–2752. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb01516.x

Castellanos, M.C., P. Wilson & J.D. Thomson (2004). Anti-bee and anti-bird changes during the evolution of humming bird pollination in Penstemon. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 17: 876–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00729.x

Gerling D., H.H.W. Velthuis & A. Hefetz (1989). Bionomics of the large carpenter bees of the genus Xylocopa. Annual Review of Entomology 34: 163–190. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.34.010189.001115

Harborne, J.B. (1973). Phytochemical Methods. Chapman and Hall, London, 288 pp.

Inouye, D.W. (1980). The terminology of floral larceny. Ecology 61: 1251–1252. https://doi.org/10.2307/1936841

Inouye, D.W. (1983). The ecology of nectar robbing, pp. 153–173. In: B. Beattey & T. Elias (eds.). The Biology of Nectaries. Columbia University Press, New York.

Irwin, R.E., A.K. Brody & N.M. Waser (2001). The impact of floral larceny on individuals, populations and communities. Oecologia 129: 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/S004420100739

Irwin R.E., J.L. Bronstein, J.S. Manson & L. Richardson (2010). Nectar robbing: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 41: 271–292. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120330

Irwin, R.E. & J.E. Maloof (2002). Variation in nectar robbing over time, space, and species. Oecologia 133: 525–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-002-1060-z

Kunte, K. (2007). India – A lifescape: Butterflies of Peninsular India. Universities Press, Hyderabad, 609 pp.

Mainero, J.S. & C.M. del Rio (1985). Cheating and taking advantage in mutualistic associations, pp. 192–216. In: D.H. Boucher (Ed.). The Biology of Mutualism: Ecology and Evolution. Croom Helm, London 388 pp.

Maloof, J.E. & D.W. Inouye (2000). Are nectar robbers cheaters or mutualists? Ecology 81: 2651–2661. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[2651:ANRCOM]2.0.CO;2

Navarro, L. (2001). Reproductive biology and effect of nectar robbing on fruit production in Macleania bullata (Ericaceae). Plant Ecology 152: 59–65. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011463520398

Newman, D.A. & J.D. Thomson (2005). Effects of nectar robbing on nectar dynamics and bumble bee foraging strategies in Linaria vulgaris (Scrophulariaceae). Oikos 110: 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.13884.x

Raju, A.J.S. (2019a). Pollination ecology of Brownlowia tersa (Malvaceae), a near threatened non-viviparous true mangrove scrub. Journal of Threatened Taxa 11(9): 14119–14127. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4906.11.9.14119-14127

Raju, A.J.S. (2019b). On the floral biology and pollination of a rare twining liana, Sarcolobus carinatus Wall. (Asclepiadoideae: Apocynaceae) in Coringa Mangrove Forest, Andhra Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 11(14): 14923–14926. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4870.11.14.14923-14926

Raju, A.J.S. (2020). Pollination ecology of oviparous semi-evergreen mangrove tree species, Xylocarpus granatum Koen and X. mekongensis Pierrie (Meliaceae) at Coringa Mangrove Forest, Andhra Pradesh, India. Annali di Botanica (Roma) 10: 67–76. https://doi.org/10.13133/2239-3129/14628

Raju, A.J.S. & H.J. Karyamsetty (2008). Reproductive ecology of mangrove trees Ceriops decandra (Griff.) Ding Hou and Ceriops tagal (Perr.) C.B. Robinson (Rhizophoraceae). Acta Botanica Croatica 67: 201–208.

Raju, A.J.S. & R. Kumar (2016a). Pollination ecology of Derris trifoliata (Fabaceae), a mangrove associate in Coringa Mangrove Forest, Andhra Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 8(5): 8788–8796. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2277.8.5.8788-8796

Raju, A.J.S. & R. Kumar (2016b). On the reproductive ecology of Suaeda maritima, S. monoica and S. nudiflora (Chenopodiaceae). Journal of Threatened Taxa 8(6): 8860–8876. https://doi.org/ 10.11609/jott.2275.8.6.8860-8876

Raju, A.J.S. & B. Rajesh (2014). Pollination ecology of Scyphiphora hydrophyllacea C.F. Gaertn. (Magnoliopsida: Rubiales: Rubiaceae), a non-viviparous evergreen tree species. Journal of Threatened Taxa 6: 6668–6676. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3998.6668-76

Raju, A.J.S., P.V.S. Rao, R. Kumar & S.R. Mohan (2012). Pollination biology of the crypto-viviparous Avicennia species (Avicenniaceae). Journal of Threatened Taxa 4: 3377–3389. https://doi.org/ 10.11609/JoTT.o2919.3377-89

Raju, P.S. & A.J.S. Raju (2014). Pollination ecology of the Gray Nicker Caesalpinia crista (Caesalpiniaceae) a mangrove associate at Coringa Mangrove Forest, Andhra Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 6: 6345–6354. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.03754.6345-54

Rojas-Nossa, S.V., J.M. Sanchez & L. Navarro (2016). Nectar robbing: a common phenomenon mainly determined by accessibility constraints, nectar volume and density of energy rewards. Oikos 125: 1044–1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.02685

Rojas-Nossa S.V., J.M. Sanchez & L. Navarro (2021). Nectar robbing and plant reproduction: an interplay of positive and negative effects. Oikos 130: 601–608. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.07556

Most read articles by the same author(s)