Jairo Andrés Cuta-Pineda, Luis Alejandro Arias-Sosa, Roxibell C. Pelayo. 2021: The flowerpiercers interactions with a community of high Andean plants. Avian Research, 12(1): 22. DOI: 10.1186/s40657-021-00256-7
Citation: Jairo Andrés Cuta-Pineda, Luis Alejandro Arias-Sosa, Roxibell C. Pelayo. 2021: The flowerpiercers interactions with a community of high Andean plants. Avian Research, 12(1): 22. DOI: 10.1186/s40657-021-00256-7

The flowerpiercers interactions with a community of high Andean plants

More Information
  • Background 

    Flowerpiercers (Diglossa) are traditionally considered as "parasites" of the pollination processes, as they can access the nectar without entering in contact with the reproductive structures of the plants. Nevertheless, the effect of flowerpiercers seems to vary according to their behavior and the flower's traits. So, in this work, we aimed to explore the floral characteristics that may determine the susceptibility to robbing and pollen transport by flowerpiercers. Also, we identified the potential types of interactions and studied interaction network properties.

    Methods 

    We collected the information of 16 ornithophilic plants regarding their floral traits and robbing frequency. Also, we captured 4 species of flowerpiercers and evaluated pollen transport (frequency and loads). We tested the correlation between floral traits, robbing frequency, and pollen transportation. Later, we used these variables in a cluster and principal component analyses to identify the potential types of interactions. Finally, we analyzed and compared the structure of the plants-flowerpiercers interaction network.

    Results 

    Nectar production significantly influenced both nectar robbing and pollen transportation. While the corolla length was only correlated to the robbing susceptibility. Also, we found that particular flowerpiercers species transported higher loads of some plant pollen, which can be related to the differences in behavior and morphometric traits. We proposed the classification of five different types of plant-flowerpiercer interactions, that showed different potential mutualist or antagonist relations based on the affectation of nectar robbing and the service of pollen transportation. The interaction networks consisted of 49 links, with 2.4 links per species, and presented indicators of a medium to high resilience, stability, and resistance (nestedness, connectance, and robustness). Also, the network presented medium to low specialization and substantial niche overlap.

    Conclusions 

    The ecological role of the flowerpiercers goes beyond its classic assignation as "parasites" as they can actively transport pollen of several Andean plants, affecting its evolutionary history and the stability of the systems.

  • Ratites, a clade of birds lacking the ability to fly, most likely originated in Gondwana (Patnaik et al., 2009). Large ratite eggs are frequently found preserved and recorded in Tertiary and Quaternary sediments. Ratite skeletons, however, are rarely preserved, so that fossil eggshells constitute a richer and more widely used source of information on ratite evolution. The distribution of extant ratites is essentially restricted to the Southern Hemisphere (Cooper et al., 2009), but several fossils have been reported from the Northern Hemisphere (Mayr, 2009). Fossils have been found in Eurasia (Lowe, 1933; Burchak-Abramovich, 1962; Sauer and Rothe, 1972; Hou et al., 2005; Bibi et al., 2006; Wang, 2008; Patnaik et al., 2009), northern Africa (Sauer, 1972; Mikhailov, 1997) and even in North America (Houde and Olson, 1981). The biogeographic history of ratites through geological time remains an active and contentious area of research.

    The first description of a fossil ratite from Asia was based on some bones collected in the Siwaliks, India (Davies, 1880); this material was subsequently named Struthio asiaticus by Milne-Edwards (Burchak-Abramovich, 1962). In 1874, Brandt (1874) described a ratite eggshell fossil from the Ukraine; since then, a great many reports concerning Eurasian fossil ratites have been published (Burchak-Abramovich, 1962; Sauer, 1972; Mikhailov, 1988; Mikhailov and Kurochkin, 1988). In China, ratite research has a long history. Lowe reported Struthio anderssoni, S. mongolicus and S. wimani from Plio-Pleistocene sediments in China (Lowe, 1931), Yang described some additional specimens from Shanxi and Hebei provinces and the Zhoukoudian locality near Beijing, and discussed their biostratigraphic significance (Yang, 1933, 1937, 1947, 1952; Yang and Sun, 1960). Zhao and his colleagues discussed the microstructure and amino acid composition of ratite eggshell fossils from the Zhoukoudian locality (Zhao et al., 1981). Hou reported two pelvic skeletons from the Miocene sediments of Hezheng (Hou et al., 2005) and more recently, fossil eggshells from the same site have been described by Wang(2007, 2008).

    During the past two decades, several ratite eggshell fossils have been collected and reported from other continents, particularly from Africa (Pickford and Dauphin, 1993; Pickford et al., 1995; Dauphin et al., 1996; Harrison and Msuya, 2005). They have been used to analyze ratite evolutionary relationships, discuss changes in their geographic distribution and establish biostratigraphic divisions. These recent studies indicate that the fossil eggshell record is potentially far more informative than previously suspected.

    Recently, a special field project carried out by the IVPP (Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chineae Academy of Sciences) in Inner Mongolia, China focused on the study of Miocene mammals. This expedition acquired a large collection of fossil micromammals in addition to some other specimens, including ratite eggshells. We briefly describe some new fossil eggshell material from the Gashunyinadege and Baogedawula localities in Inner Mongolia. These specimens provide important new data on the distribution of fossil ratites in China.

    Ten eggshell fragments were recovered from two localities, six from Gashunyinadege and four from Baogedawula (Fig. 1). Gashunyinadege is about 40 km south of Sonid Zuoqi (Sunitezuoqi), Inner Mongolia (43°33′39.2″N, 113°32′51.9″E) and has been studied in detail by various paleontologists after being initially reported by Meng and others (Meng et al., 1996; Qiu and Wang, 1999; Qiu et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2009). The Gashunyinadege fauna was initially assigned a Late Oligocene-Early Miocene age (Meng et al., 1996), but was later reassessed as an Early Miocene deposit (about 17.5 Ma) on the basis of micromammals (Qiu et al., 2006). Baogedawula, however, is some 3 km northeast of Baogeawula Sumu, Abaga Qi (44°08′33.8″N, 114°35′41.6″E), Inner Mongolia (Qiu et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2009). The deposits consist of grayish and yellow sandy mudstones and sandstones dating to 7.11 ± 0.48 Ma. For more information about these two localities, see Qiu et al. (2006).

    Figure  1.  Geographic locations of fossil localities in Inner Mongolia, China

    Ratite eggshells can be identified using both macroscopic and microscopic approaches (She, 1995). The macroscopic approach is to observe or measure characters including pore complex structure, pore density and shell thickness using a low power hand lens and a set of calipers (Pickford et al., 1995). The microscopic approach is to polish the eggshells and then section them for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and optical microscopy in order to observe their internal layering, crystal arrangement and other detailed features. The present study utilizes both approaches to analyze the new Inner Mongolian eggshell fragments and try to arrive at a comprehensive description.

    The thickness of each eggshell fragment was measured using calipers; subsequently, we selected three well-preserved eggshell fragments from each fossil site and used them to prepare microscopic samples. SEM samples were used for observing the radial section of each selected fragment as well as its inner and outer surfaces. Each sample was first polished with sandpaper, then etched with 1% hydrochloric acid (5 s for the inner surface, 18 s for the outer surface and 45 s for the radial section), which was then washed off and coated with gold in a vacuum environment (Becking, 1975; Pooley, 1979; Mikhailov, 1987; She, 1995; Mikhailov, 1997). Finally, scanning electron microscopy (JSM model No. 6100) was used to examine each prepared sample and make measurements of pore diameters. We also made thin sections in order to observe each sample using optical microscopy.

    The eggshell samples collected from Gashunyinadege are smooth, with sting-point pores distributed on their outer surfaces, producing no depressions or pore complexes. The pores can be seen with the naked eye (Fig. 2, left). Through a low power hand lens, most pores can be seen to occur in pairs and to range in diameter from 0.1–0.2 mm; however, some of the pores are isolated. These features are consistent with the normal characteristics of sting pores (Sauer, 1972). As to the pore density, more than 70 pores per cm2 can be seen with the naked eye, compared to 130 pores per cm2 under SEM examination. Their entire thickness averages around 2.12 mm (from 1.7 to 2.2 mm; n = 6 measured in 36 places). SEM examination (Fig. 3) shows that most of the pores are elliptical or in sting shape (Fig. 3b, c). In a cross-sectional view (Fig. 3a), the surface crystal layer is very thin, the outer portion of the column layer is slightly thicker than in Orientornis linxiaensis (Fig. 3e) and the ratio of the thickness of the cone layer to that of the entire column layer is about 1:2.4. The cunei run from the cone layer to the inner column layer. The pore canals are non-branching and straight (Fig. 3e).

    Figure  2.  Eggshell fragments from Inner Mongolia, China; note the pore pattern and size of each fragment. Left, eggshell fossils from the Gashunyinadege locality; Right, eggshell fossils from the Baogedawula locality.
    Figure  3.  Micrographs of the eggshells from Gashunyinadege. (ad) Scanning electron micrographs. (a) Radial section of the eggshell; (b) Outer surface of the eggshell, note the pore shape under the SEM; (c) Pore pattern shown on (b) is magnified; (d) Inner surface of the eggshell; (e) Radial section of the eggshells under the optical microscopy, note the pore canal shape.

    Samples from Baogedawula are similar in their pore pattern to those from Gashunyinadege. It is clear that small pore openings are irregularly distributed on the smooth outer surface, producing no depressions or pore complexes (Fig. 2, right). They show a relatively low pore density, about 8–15 pores per cm2 can be seen with the naked eye, but under the SEM, more tiny pores appear in the field (Fig. 4a) and the density rises to about 50 pores per cm2. From the SEM results (Fig. 4), the pore diameter ranges from 0.05–0.2 mm and the pores are round or elliptical and uniformly distributed on the outer surface. The pore distribution seems to display some regularity, in that the elliptical pores are always in pairs and the round ones are single. Details of the inner surface, however, cannot be observed clearly because they are obscured by sediment (Fig. 4b). As the cross-sectional view shows, the samples range in thickness from 1.7 to 2.1 mm, with a mean of 2.02 mm (n = 4 measured in 23 places); the pore canals are single and straight (Fig. 4c), with rough inner surfaces (Fig. 4d); the columnar layer is compact (Fig. 4e); the ratio of the thickness of the cone layer to that of the columnar layer is about 1:1.4. The cone layer is thinner, representing about one third of the entire shell thickness, the cones are slender and compact (Fig. 4f).

    Figure  4.  Micrographs of the eggshells from Baogeawula. (ae) Scanning electron micrographs. (a) Outer surface of the eggshell; (b) Inner surface of the eggshell; (c) Radial section of the eggshell; (d) Radial section of the eggshell, note the characteristics of the pore canals; (e) Upper portion of the radial section, note the crystal arrangement; (f) Radial section of the eggshell under optical microscopy.

    Obviously, the eggshells from Gashunyinadege and Baogedawula share a smooth outer surface; although the Baogedawula samples show considerable wear (Fig. 4a) and are close in thickness to those from Gashunyinadege. However, there are also some significant differences between the eggshell fragments from Gashunyinadege and those from Baogedawula. Pore density in the Gashunyinadege samples is more than 70 per cm2, slightly higher than in the Baogedawula samples. In cross-sectional view, the cone density of the Gashunyinadege samples is somewhat higher than in the Baogedawula samples; furthermore, the column layer is much thicker in the former than in the latter and the Gashunyinadege samples also differ from the Baogedawula samples in having a relatively thicker outer column layer.

    According to this description, these new eggshell fragments differ from Aepyornis eggshells in having a generally lower thickness and lacking pore grooves (Bibi et al., 2006), differ from Diamantornis eggshells in having a lower thickness and in lacking pore complexes (Pickford and Dauphin, 1993). Compared with Struthio camelus, the pore density of these Inner Mongolian eggshell fossils is higher; they also differ from S. camelus in lacking pore complexes. Their thickness is slightly less than in Struthio chrosonensis, S. kakesiensis, S. karingarabensis (Harrison and Msuya, 2005) and even in Orientornis linxiaensis (Wang, 2007). Also, pores of Struthio daberasensis clump together and produce "a reticulation of minuscule flat islands" (Sauer, 1972) while the pores of the new specimens are paired or single. The new specimens also differ from S. anderssoni in lacking pore pits. Sauer (1972) generalized the characters of the struthionid pore pattern, emphasizing that most of the clustered pores and grooves are located in pits and that there is no pore alignment in parallel with the axes of the egg; besides, the pore canals seen in struthionid eggshell are divergent. However, the new Inner Mongolian specimens lack these critical characters, implying that they do not represent typical struthionid eggshell. Previously, almost all ostrich eggshell fossils in China were described as S. anderssoni (Lowe, 1931), but recent studies suggest that additional types of eggshell fossils exist in China. The new specimens represent one such type, but we consider the material too fragmentary to justify the formal erection of a new taxon.

    Both similarities and differences between these Inner Mongolian fossils and Orientornis linxiaensis are obvious. The eggshell fossils from these two independent localities share characters including a smooth outer surface and similar pore shape. The pores of the new specimens are larger and more densely distributed than in O. linxiaensis. Furthermore, the column layer is proportionally thinner in the new material than in O. linxiaensis.

    Ratite eggshells are generally classified as either struthionid-type or aepyornithid-type (Patnaik et al., 2009). Sauer (1972) first described ratite eggshells with smooth outer surfaces and a sting-point pore pattern. According to his description, the pore pattern is the key distinguishing character of this type of eggshell. Pores on these eggshells are always linearly aligned long, and form short grooves with a dagger point, tiny circular to ovoid needle point pore shapes. Because these characters are quite similar to those of Aepyornis maximus in Madagascar, many authors have designated smooth eggshells of this kind as aepyornithid-type eggshells (Sauer and Sauer, 1978; Bibi et al., 2006). In gross morphology, the new Inner Mongolian fossils are similar to aepyornithid-type eggshells: their sting-point pores occur in rows that are conspicuously oriented parallel to one another very close in thickness to aepyornithid-type eggshells from Lanzarote (Sauer and Rothe, 1972). The only difference is that the new specimens lack pore grooves. Hence we are inclined to believe that these Inner Mongolian fossil materials may belong to aepyornithid-type eggs. Unfortunately, however, most studies on aepyornithid-type eggshell have not presented cross-sectional features, so that the new specimens cannot be readily compared to previously described aepyornithid-type material with respect to cross-sectional morphology.

    Most previously collected aepyornithid-type eggshell material has come from the Miocene-Pliocene sediments of western Europe and Asia (Sauer, 1972; Sauer and Rothe, 1972; Sauer, 1976; Sauer and Sauer, 1978; Stern et al., 1994; Harris and Leakey, 2003); however, Sauer (1972) reported some aepyornithid-like eggshell fragments from the Eocene Irdin Manha Formation. At Camp Margetts, near Iren Dabasu, Inner Mongolia, China (Sauer, 1972), and Bibi et al. (2006) reported aepyornithid-type eggshells from the Oligocene sediments of Mongolia. If these occurrences can be confirmed, the stratigraphic range of aepyornithid-type eggshells in East Asia would extend down into the Eocene (Bibi et al., 2006). It appears to be true because the age of the Gashunyinadege eggshells were dated at about 17.5 Ma, close to the Oligocene-Miocene boundary. It is quite possible that even earlier eggshells, from the Oligocene or Eocene, do in fact exist.

    Patnaik et al. (2009) suggested that ratites dispersed into Eurasia from Africa via an India-Madagascar biogeographic link. The Indian subcontinent was connected with the African plate during the Cretaceous. Subsequently, the India subcontinent drifted northward, and collided with Asia in a process that started at about 65 Ma and was completed by the end of Eocene (Zhu et al., 2005; Mo et al., 2007). If this biogeographic hypothesis is true, early ratites would be expected to have spread into Eurasia not earlier than the Eocene. However, more fossil evidence from the Indian subcontinent is needed in order to confirm this view. Another important aspect of ratite paleobiogeography is that both struthionid-type and aepyornithid-type eggshells have been found in Lanzarote, Canary Islands (Sauer and Rothe, 1972), in Siwalik (Sauer, 1972; Stern et al., 1994; Patnaik et al., 2009) and in Inner Mongolia (Sauer, 1972). In other words, the two types occur together at sites located from western Europe to East Asia. However, the aepyornithid-type eggshells from these three localities seem much older than the associated struthionid-type eggshells (Sauer, 1972; Sauer and Rothe, 1972; Patnaik et al., 2009). From the perspective of biochronology, the eggshells collected from the Irdin Manha Formation (Sauer, 1972) and Gashunyinadege might be considered the earliest presently known aepyornithid-type eggshell fossils (respectively Eocene, dated to 17.5 Ma), whereas struthionid-type eggshells occur in the Pliocene of this area according to Sauer (1972). Stern et al. (1994) identified some aepyornithid-type eggshells from Siwalik (about 11 Ma, whereas struthionid-type eggshell fragments from the same area range in age from 2.2 to 0.5 Ma). Orientornis linxiaensis (9.6 Ma) eggshells have a smooth surface, but are characterized by pores that are different from those of the Gashunyinadege specimens (Wang, 2007). Finally, the Baogedawula (7.11 Ma) samples again display a smooth outer surface and aepyornithid-like pore shape. The record suggests that ratites that laid aepyornithid-type eggs were present in Eurasia well before those that produced struthionid-type eggs. We are not sure whether this phenomenon simply implies two independent dispersal events of ratites, an early dispersal involving aepyornithid-laying birds and a later one involving struthionid-laying birds, into Eurasia.

    Mikhailov and Kurochkin reviewed the morphology and distribution of ratite eggshell fossils from Eurasia based on a large amount of material (Mikhailov, 1988; Mikhailov and Kurochkin, 1988); they concluded that aepyornithid-type eggshells appeared and disappeared periodically during the Neogene, alternating with struthionid-type eggshells. They considered both types of eggshell to belong to the genus Struthio. The characteristics that define the two types, i.e., pore structure and shell thickness, varied in response to the alternation of humid and dry conditions, or cold and warm ones (Mikhailov, 1988; Mikhailov and Kurochkin, 1988). This conclusion is still controversial because their results were largely based on morphological characters and lack supporting geochemical data. Since geochemical data would better reflect changes in climate, Stern et al. (1994) examined stable carbon and oxygen isotopes in ratite eggshell fossils from the Siwaliks, focusing on determining the nature and timing of environmental change in the Himalayan foothills. Stern et al. (1994) claimed that no differences in mineral content exist among aepyornithid-type, struthionid-type and extant ostrich eggshells, whereas the isotope value of aepyornithid-type eggshells is quite similar to that of struthionid-type eggshells at the specific time point of 2.24 Ma. This suggests that both aepyornithid-type and struthionid-type eggshells occurred at the same time period, sharing a similar environment. In contrast, although the δ18O values of aepyornithid-type eggshells from 5.26 to 2.34 Ma are quite different and the δ13C values also indicate their dietary sources had not changed during these 3 Ma (Stern et al., 1994), it has been clearly shown that aepyornithid-type eggshell characteristics were stable during this time and that struthionid-type eggshells did not appear until 2.24 Ma. Therefore, Mikhailov's conclusions might, to some extent, be problematic.

    Gashunyinadege and Baogedawula are both important Miocene sites in China; they have been repeatedly mentioned in the literature (Meng et al., 1996; Qiu and Wang, 1999; Qiu et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2009). The Gashunyinadege fauna contains at least 40 taxa of mammals and the Baogedawula fauna 22. Most of the mammals, especially micromammals, are ones that dispersed wilely within Eurasia (Qiu et al., 2006). This suggests that the central Inner Mongolian localities had good possibilities for interchange with other faunas. The faunal compositions of these two localities reflect a gradual drying of the Mongolia plateau during Miocene (Dong et al., 2006; Qiu et al., 2006; Liu et al., 2009). The reduction of the number of pores from the Gashunyinadege sample to the Baogedawula sample, some 10 Ma later, may reflect a response to this drying process.

    We thank Dr. Zhuding Qiu, Dr. Qiang Li, Dr. Xijun Ni (IVPP) and Yuri Kimura (National Science Museum, Japan) for preparing specimens; Yannicke Dauphin (University of Paris XI-Orsay, Franch), Dr. E.N. Kurochkin (Paleontological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences), Dr. Yaroslav Kuzmin (Institute of Geology & Mineralogy, Russia) and Dr. Rejeev Patnaik (Panjab University, India) for providing important references; Wending Zhang and Shukang Zhang (IVPP) for technical expertise and photography and Corwin Sullivan and Rejeev Patnaik for reviewing the manuscript. This study was supported by the Knowledge Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (KZCX2-YW-120) and the Key Laboratory of Evolutionary Systematics of Vertebrates, Chinese Academy of Sciences (2010LESV007).

  • Adedoja O, Dormann CF, Kehinde T, Samways MJ. Refuges from fire maintain pollinator–plant interaction networks. Ecol Evol. 2019;9: 5777–86.
    Aguilar JM, Tinoco BA. Pollination ecology of Axinaea merianiae in the high Andes from south Ecuador: nectar characteristics and bird pollinators. ACI Avances En Ciencias E Ingenierías. 2017. .
    Almeida-Neto M, Guimarães P, Guimarães PR, Loyola RD, Ulrich W. A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos. 2008;117: 1227–39.
    Ballantyne G, Baldock KCR, Willmer PG. Constructing more informative plant-pollinator networks: visitation and pollen deposition networks in a heathland plant community. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2015;282: 20151130.
    Baumgartner MT. Connectance and nestedness as stabilizing factors in response to pulse disturbances in adaptive antagonistic networks. J Theor Biol. 2020;486: 110073.
    Burgos E, Ceva H, Perazzo RPJ, Devoto M, Medan D, Zimmermann M, et al. Why nestedness in mutualistic networks? J Theor Biol. 2007;249: 307–13.
    Campbell C, Yang S, Albert R, Shea K. A network model for plant-pollinator community assembly. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108: 197–202.
    Cantor M, Pires MM, Marquitti FMD, Raimundo RLG, Sebastián-González E, Coltri PP, et al. Nestedness across biological scales. PLoS ONE. 2017;12: e0171691.
    Castro S, Silveira P, Navarro L. Floral traits variation, legitimate pollination, and nectar robbing in Polygala vayredae (Polygalaceae). Ecol Res. 2009;24: 47–55.
    Chapman CA, Wrangham R, Chapman LJ. Indices of habitat-wide fruit abundance in tropical forest. Biotropica. 1994;26: 160–71.
    Cronk Q, Ojeda I. Bird-pollinated flowers in an evolutionary and molecular context. J Exp Bot. 2008;59: 715–27.
    Cuevas E, Rosas-Guerrero V. Spatio-temporal variation of nectar robbing in Salvia gesneriflora and its effects on nectar production and legitimate visitors. Plant Biol. 2016;18: 9–14.
    del Carmen Pelayo Escalona R. Implicaciones ecológicas y evolutivas del robo de néctar en ecosistemas neotropicales venezolanos. Doctoral's Thesis. Vigo: Universidad de Vigo; 2017.
    Dellinger AS, Penneys DS, Staedler YM, Fragner L, Weckwerth W, Schönenberger J. A specialized bird pollination system with a bellows mechanism for pollen transfer and staminal food body rewards. Curr Biol. 2014;24: 1615–9.
    Dormann CF, Gruber B, Fründ J. Introducing the bipartite package: analysing ecological networks. R News. 2008;8: 8–11.
    Dormann CF, Fründ J, Blüthgen N, Gruber B. Indices, graphs and null models: analyzing bipartite ecological networks. Open Ecol J. 2009;2: 7–24.
    Fleming TH, Muchhala N. Nectar-feeding bird and bat niches in two worlds: pantropical comparisons of vertebrate pollination systems. J Biogeogr. 2008;35: 764–80.
    Gonzalez O, Loiselle BA. Species interactions in an Andean bird-flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology. PeerJ. 2016;4: e2789.
    Graves GR. Pollination of a Tristerix mistletoe (Loranthaceae) by Diglossa (Aves, Thraupidae). Biotropica. 1982;14: 316–7.
    Gresty CEA, Clare E, Devey DS, Cowan RS, Csiba L, Malakasi P, et al. Flower preferences and pollen transport networks for cavity-nesting solitary bees: implications for the design of agri-environment schemes. Ecol Evol. 2018;8: 7574–87.
    Hazlehurst JA, Karubian JO. Nectar robbing impacts pollinator behavior but not plant reproduction. Oikos. 2016;125: 1668–76.
    Hazlehurst JA, Karubian JO. Impacts of nectar robbing on the foraging ecology of a territorial hummingbird. Behav Processes. 2018;149: 27–34.
    Hu L, Dong Y, Sun S. Relative species abundance successfully predicts nestedness and interaction frequency of monthly pollination networks in an alpine meadow. PLoS ONE. 2019;14: e0224316.
    IDEAM. Reportes de precipitación Pachavita-Boyacá. Pachavita; 2016.
    Irwin RE, Brody AK. Nectar robbing in Ipomopsis aggregata: effects on pollinator behavior and plant fitness. Oecologia. 1998;116: 519–27.
    Irwin RE, Bronstein JL, Manson JS, Richardson L. Nectar robbing: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2010;41: 271–92.
    Johnson SD. The pollination niche and its role in the diversification and maintenance of the southern African flora. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2010;365: 499–516.
    Kearns CA, Inouye DW, Waser NM. Endangered mutualisms: the conservation of plant-pollinator interactions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 1998;29: 83–112.
    Kuhnen VV, Romero GQ, Linhares AX, Vizentin-Bugoni J, Porto EAC, Setz EZF. Diet overlap and spatial segregation between two neotropical marsupials revealed by multiple analytical approaches. PLoS ONE. 2017;12: e0181188.
    Lara C, Ornelas J. Preferential nectar robbing of flowers with long corollas: experimental studies of two hummingbird species visiting three plant species. Oecologia. 2001;128: 263–73.
    Maruyama PK, Vizentin-Bugoni J, Dalsgaard B, Sazima I, Sazima M. Nectar robbery by a hermit hummingbird: association to floral phenotype and its influence on flowers and network structure. Oecologia. 2015;178: 783–93.
    Memmott J. Food webs: a ladder for picking strawberries or a practical tool for practical problems? Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2009;364: 1693–9.
    Memmott J, Waser NM, Price MV. Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2004;271: 2605–11.
    Montoya JM, Pimm SL, Solé RV. Ecological networks and their fragility. Nature. 2006;442: 259–64.
    Navarro L. Pollination ecology of Anthyllis vulneraria subsp. vulgaris (Fabaceae): nectar robbers as pollinators. Am J Bot. 2000;87: 980–5.
    Navarro L. Reproductive biology and effect of nectar robbing on fruit production in Macleania bullata (Ericaceae). Plant Ecol. 2001;152: 59–65.
    Navarro L, Guitián P, Ayensa G. Pollination ecology of Disterigma stereophyllum (Ericaceae) in south-western Colombia. Plant Biol. 2008;10: 512–8.
    Navarro L, Medel R. Relationship between floral tube length and nectar robbing in Duranta erecta L. (Verbenaceae). Biol J Linn Soc. 2009;96: 392–8.
    Novella-Fernandez R, Rodrigo A, Arnan X, Bosch J. Interaction strength in plant-pollinator networks: are we using the right measure? PLoS ONE. 2019;14: e0225930.
    Ollerton J, Winfree R, Tarrant S. How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos. 2011;120: 321–6.
    Parada-Quintero M, Alarcón-Jiménez D, Rosero-Lasprilla L. Flowering phenology of ornithophilous species from the lower stratum in two High-Andean habitats in the Parque Natural Municipal Rancheria (Paipa-Boyacá-Colombia). Caldasia. 2012;34: 139–54.
    Pelayo RC, Rengifo C, Soriano PJ. Avian nectar robbers of Passiflora mixta (Passifloraceae): do they have a positive effect on the plant? Interciencia. 2011;36: 587–92.
    Pelayo RC, Soriano PJ, Márquez NJ, Navarro L. Phenological patterns and pollination network structure in a Venezuelan páramo: a community-scale perspective on plant-animal interactions. Plant Ecol Divers. 2019;12: 607–18.
    Popic TJ, Wardle GM, Davila YC. Flower-visitor networks only partially predict the function of pollen transport by bees. Austral Ecol. 2013;38: 76–86.
    Richardson SC. Are nectar-robbers mutualists or antagonists? Oecologia. 2004;139: 246–54.
    Roitman GG, Montaldo NH, Medan D. Pollination biology of Myrrhinium atropurpureum (Myrtaceae): sweet, fleshy petals attract frugivorous birds. Biotropica. 1997;29: 162–8.
    Rojas-Nossa SV. Ecología de la comunidad de pinchaflores (Aves: Diglossa y Diglossopis) en un bosque Altoandino. Universida Nacional de Colombia; 2005.
    Rojas-Nossa SV. Strategies of nectar extraction by flowerpiercers (Aves: Diglossa and Diglossopis) and their effects on the pollination of high Andean plants. Ornitol Colomb. 2007;5: 21–39.
    Rojas-Nossa SV. Association between nectar robbing and floral characteristics in a montane community of the Colombian Andes. Ecosistemas. 2013;22: 107–12.
    Rojas-Nossa SV, Sánchez JM, Navarro L. Nectar robbing: a common phenomenon mainly determined by accessibility constraints, nectar volume and density of energy rewards. Oikos. 2016a;125: 1044–55.
    Rojas-Nossa SV, Sánchez JM, Navarro L. Effects of nectar robbing on male and female reproductive success of a pollinator-dependent plant. Ann Bot. 2016b;117: 291–7.
    Roubik DW. The ecological impact of nectar-robbing bees and pollinating hummingbirds on a tropical shrub. Ecology. 1982;63: 354–60.
    Saavedra S, Rohr RP, Olesen JM, Bascompte J. Nested species interactions promote feasibility over stability during the assembly of a pollinator community. Ecol Evol. 2016;6: 997–1007.
    Schondube JE, del Rio CM. The flowerpiercers' hook: an experimental test of an evolutionary trade-off. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2003;270: 195–8.
    Schondube JE, del Rio CM. Sugar and protein digestion in flowerpiercers and hummingbirds: a comparative test of adaptive convergence. J Comp Physiol B. 2004;174: 263–73.
    Singh VK, Barman C, Tandon R. Nectar robbing positively influences the reproductive success of Tecomella undulata (Bignoniaceae). PLoS ONE. 2014;9: e102607.
    Stewart AB, Sritongchuay T, Teartisup P, Kaewsomboon S, Bumrungsri S. Habitat and landscape factors influence pollinators in a tropical megacity, Bangkok. Thailand PeerJ. 2018;6: e5335.
    Stiles FG. Geographical aspects of bird-flower coevolution, with particular reference to Central America. Ann Missouri Bot Gard. 1981;68: 323–51.
    Stiles FG, Ayala AV, Girón M. Polinizacion de las flores de Brachyotum (Melastomataceae) por dos especies de Diglossa (Emberizidae). Caldasia. 1992;17: 47–54.
    Traveset A, Olesen JM, Nogales M, Vargas P, Jaramillo P, Antolín E, et al. Bird-flower visitation networks in the Galápagos unveil a widespread interaction release. Nat Commun. 2015;6: 6376.
    Tur C, Vigalondo B, Trøjelsgaard K, Olesen JM, Traveset A. Downscaling pollen-transport networks to the level of individuals. J Anim Ecol. 2014;83: 306–17.
    Valverde S, Piñero J, Corominas-Murtra B, Montoya J, Joppa L, Solé R. The architecture of mutualistic networks as an evolutionary spandrel. Nat Ecol Evol. 2018;2: 94–9.
    Villareal E. Estrategias de forrajeo y recursos florales utilizados, una explicación de la coexistencia de especies del género Diglossa (Familia: Thraupidae) en la Región Andina del Departamento de Nariño. Universidad de Nariño; 2014.
    Willcox BK, Howlett BG, Robson AJ, Cutting B, Evans L, Jesson L, et al. Evaluating the taxa that provide shared pollination services across multiple crops and regions. Sci Rep. 2019;9: 13538.
    Ye ZM, Jin XF, Wang QF, Yang CF, Inouye DW. Nectar replenishment maintains the neutral effects of nectar robbing on female reproductive success of Salvia przewalskii (Lamiaceae), a plant pollinated and robbed by bumble bees. Ann Bot. 2017;119: 1053–9.
    Zhang YW, Yu Q, Zhao JM, Guo YH. Differential effects of nectar robbing by the same bumble-bee species on three sympatric Corydalis species with varied mating systems. Ann Bot. 2009;104: 33–9.
    Zhu XF, Wan JP, Li QJ. Nectar robbers pollinate flowers with sexual organs hidden within corollas in distylous Primula secundiflora (Primulaceae). Biol Lett. 2010;6: 785–7.
  • Related Articles

  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(3)

    1. Ettore Camerlenghi, G. Giselle Mangini, Rodolfo O. Anderson, et al. Long corolla flowers in Tropical Andes favour nectar robbing by the Black Metaltail hummingbird: A study using citizen science and field observations. Austral Ecology, 2024, 49(9) DOI:10.1111/aec.13591
    2. Sailee P. Sakhalkar, Štěpán Janeček, Yannick Klomberg, et al. Cheaters among pollinators: Nectar robbing and thieving vary spatiotemporally with floral traits in Afrotropical forests. Ecosphere, 2023, 14(11) DOI:10.1002/ecs2.4696
    3. Gary R. Graves. The Campsis-Icterus association as a model system for avian nectar-robbery studies. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12(1) DOI:10.1038/s41598-022-16237-9

    Other cited types(0)

Catalog

    Figures(4)  /  Tables(3)

    Article Metrics

    Article views (944) PDF downloads (7) Cited by(3)

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return