Nectar robbing does not affect female reproductive success of an endangered Antirrhinum species, Plantaginaceae

References

• Adler LS, Leege LM, Irwin RE. 2016. Geographic variation in resistance to nectar robbing and consequences for pollination. Am J Bot. 103:1819–1828.
   Google Scholar
• Burkle LA, Irwin RE, Newman DA. 2007. Predicting the effects of nectar robbing on plant reproduction: implications of pollen limitation and plant mating system. Am J Bot. 94:1935–1943.
   Google Scholar
• Carbonell JB. 1950. Estudio fitogeográfico de la Sierra de Corbera (Valencia). Anales del Jardín Botánico de Madrid. 9:361–483.
   Google Scholar
• Carrió E, Herreros R, Blalsco P, Güemes J. 2006. Antirrhinum valentinum Font Quer. In: Bañares A, Blanca G, Güemes J, Moreno JC, Ortiz S, editors. Atlas y Libro Rojo de la Flora Vascular Amenazada de España. Madrid: Dirección General para la Biodiversidad – Sociedad Española de Biología de la Conservación de Plantas; p. 60–61.
   Google Scholar
• Carrió E, Güemes J. 2014. The effectiveness of pre- and post-zygotic barriers in avoiding hybridization between two snapdragons (Antirrhinum L.: Plantaginaceae). Bot J Linn Soc. 176:159–172.
   Google Scholar
• Carrió E, Jiménez JF, Sánchez-Gomez P, Güemes J. 2009. Reproductive biology and conservation implications of three endangered snapdragon species (Antirrhinum, Plantaginaceae). Biol Conserv. 142:1854–1863.
   Google Scholar
• Castro S, Silveira P, Navarro L. 2008. Consequences of nectar robbing for the fitness of a threatened plant species. Plant Ecol. 199:201–208.
   Google Scholar
• Castro S, Silveira P, Navarro L. 2009. Floral traits variation, legitimate pollination, and nectar robbing in Polygala vayredae (Polygalaceae). Ecol Res. 24:47–55.
   Google Scholar
• Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B. 1987. Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 18:237–268.
   Google Scholar
• Cuevas E, Rosas-Guerrero V. 2015. Spatio-temporal variation of nectar robbing in Salvia gesneriflora and its effects on nectar production and legitimate visitors. Plant Biol. 18:9–14.
   Google Scholar
• Dedej S, Delaplane K. 2005. Net energetic advantage drives honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) to nectar larceny in Vaccinium ashei Reade. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 57:398–403.
   Google Scholar
• DOCV. 2009. Decreto 70/2009, de 22 de mayo, del Consell, por el que se crea y regula el Catálogo Valenciano de Especies de Flora Amenazadas y se regulan medidas adicionales de conservación. DOCV 6021 (26.5. 2009): 20.143-20.162.
   Google Scholar
• Fox K, Anderson KM, Andres R, Foster MC, Foster CE, Vik D, Vitt P, Harris MO. 2015. Nectar robbery and thievery in the hawk moth (Lepidoptera: sphingidae)-pollinated western prairie fringed orchid Platanthera praeclara. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 108:1000–1013.
   Google Scholar
• Gotelli NJ, Ellison AM. 2004. A primer of ecological statistics. Sunderland (Massachusetts, USA): Sinauer Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Güemes J. 2009. Antirrhinum L. In: Castroviejo S, Herrero A, Benedí C, Rico E, Güemes J, editors. Flora Iberica (Vol. 13). Madrid: CSIC; p. 134–166.
   Google Scholar
• Guitián J, Sánchez JM, Guitián P. 1994. Pollination ecology of Petrocoptis grandiflora Rothm (Caryophyllaceae) - a species endemic to the north-west part of the Iberian peninsula. Bot J Linn Soc. 115:19–27.
   Google Scholar
• Hazlehurst JA, Karubian JO. 2016. Nectar robbing impacts pollinator behavior but not plant reproduction. Oikos. 125:1668–1676.
   Google Scholar
• Heiberger RM 2009. HH: statistical analysis and data display: Heiberger and Holland. R package version, 2-1.
   Google Scholar
• Herrera CM. 1989. Pollinator abundance, morphology, and flower visitation rate: analysis of the “quantity” component in a plant-pollinator system. Oecologia. 80:241–248.
   Google Scholar
• Hingston AB, McQuillan PB. 1999. Displacement of tasmanian native megachilid bees by the recently introduced bumblebee Bombus terrestris (Linnaeus 1758) (Hymenoptera: apidae). Aust J Zool. 47:59–65.
   Google Scholar
• Inouye DW. 1980. The terminology of floral larceny. Ecology. 61:1251–1253.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE. 2006. The consequences of direct versus indirect species interactions to selection on traits: pollination and nectar robbing in Ipomopsis aggregata. Am Nat. 167:315–328.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE, Brody AK. 1999. Nectar-robbing bumble bees reduce the fitness of Ipomopsis aggregata (Polemoniaceae). Ecology. 80:1703–1712.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE, Brody AK, Waser NM. 2001. The impact of floral larceny on individuals, populations, and communities. Oecologia. 129:161–168.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE, Brody JL. 2000. Consequences of nectar robbing for realized male function in a hummingbird-pollinated plant. Ecology. 81:2637–2643.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE, Bronstein JL, Manson JS, Richardson L. 2010. Nectar robbing: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 41:271–292.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE, Howell P, Galen C. 2015. Quantifying direct vs. indirect effects of nectar robbers on male and female components of plant fitness. J Ecol. 103:1487–1497.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin RE, Maloof JE. 2002. Variation in nectar robbing over time, space and species. Oecologia. 133:525–533.
   Google Scholar
• Kadmon R, Shmida A. 1992. Departure rules used by bees foraging for nectar: a field test. Evol Ecol. 6:142–151.
   Google Scholar
• Klinkhamer PG, de Jong TJ. 1993. Attractiveness to pollinators: a plant’s dilemma. Oikos. 66:180–184.
   Google Scholar
• Lara C, Ornelas JF. 2001. Preferential nectar robbing of flowers with long corollas: experimental studies of two hummingbird species visiting three plant species. Oecologia. 128:263–273.
   Google Scholar
• Leadbeater E, Chittka L 2008. Social transmission of nectar-robbing behaviour in bumble-bees. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biologial Sciences 275:1669–1674. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.0270.
   Google Scholar
• Lobo JA, Ramos DDL, Braga AC. 2016. Visitation rate of pollinators and nectar robbers to the flowers and inflorescences of Tabebuia aurea (Bignoniaceae): effects of floral display size and habitat fragmentation. Bot J Linn Soc. 181:667–681.
   Google Scholar
• Maloof JE. 2001. The effects of a bumble bee nectar robber on plant reproductive success and pollinator behavior. Am J Bot. 88:1960–1965.
   Google Scholar
• Maloof JE, Inouye DW. 2000. Are nectar robbers cheaters or mutualists? Ecology. 81:2651–2661.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer C, Dehon C, Gauthier A-L, Naveau O, Rigo C, Jacquemart A-L. 2014. Nectar robbing improves male reproductive success of the endangered Aconitum napellus ssp lusitanicum. Evol Ecol. 28:669–685.
   Google Scholar
• McDade LA, Kinsman S. 1980. The impact of floral parasitism in two neotropical hummingbird-pollinated plant-species. Evolution. 34:944–958.
   Google Scholar
• Mendiburu F 2017. Agricolae: statistical procedures for agricultural research, R package version, 1.2-8. [accessed 2018 Oct 1]. https://tarwi.lamolina.edu.pe/~fmendiburu/.
   Google Scholar
• Milet-Pinheiro P, Schlindwein C. 2009. Pollination in Jacaranda rugosa (Bignoniaceae): euglossine pollinators, nectar robbers and low fruit set. Plant Biol. 11:131–141.
   Google Scholar
• Moreno JC. 2008. Lista Roja 2008 de la Flora Vascular Española. Madrid: Dirección General de Medio Natural y Política Forestal. (Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, y Medio Rural y Marino, y Sociedad de Biología de la Conservación de Plantas).
   Google Scholar
• Morris WF. 1996. Mutualism denied? Nectar-robbing bumble bees do not reduce female or male success of bluebells. Ecology. 77:1451–1462.
   Google Scholar
• Navarro L. 1999. Pollination ecology and effect of nectar removal in Macleania bullata (Ericaceae). Biotropica. 31:618–625.
   Google Scholar
• Navarro L. 2000. Pollination ecology of Anthyllis vulneraria subsp. vulgaris (Fabaceae): nectar robbers as pollinators. Am J Bot. 87:980–985.
   Google Scholar
• Navarro L. 2001. Reproductive biology and effect of nectar robbing on fruit production in Macleania bullata (Ericaceae). Plant Ecol. 152:59–65.
   Google Scholar
• Navarro L, Guitián P, Ayensa G. 2008. Pollination ecology of Disterigma stereophyllum (Ericaceae) in the south-western Colombia. Plant Biol. 10:512–518.
   Google Scholar
• Navarro L, Medel R. 2009. Relationship between floral tube length and nectar robbing in Duranta erecta L (Verbenaceae). Biol J Linn Soc. 96:392–398.
   Google Scholar
• Obeso JR. 1992. Geographic Distribution and Community Structure of Bumblebees in the Northern Iberian Peninsula. Oecologia. 89:244–252.
   Google Scholar
• Pyke GH. 1978. Optimal foraging: movement patterns of bumblebees between inflorescences. Theor Popul Biol. 13:72–98.
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. 2009. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.r-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Richman SK, Irwin RE, Bosak JT, Bronstein JL. 2018. Consequences of secondary nectar robbing for male components of plant reproduction. Am J Bot. 105:943–949.
   Google Scholar
• Rojas-Nossa SV, Sánchez JM, Navarro L. 2016. Nectar robbing: a common phenomenon determined by accessibility constraints, nectar volume and density of energy rewards. Oikos. 125:1044–1055.
   Google Scholar
• Roubik DW. 1982. The ecological impact of nectar-robbing bees and pollinating hummingbirds on a tropical shrub. Ecology. 63:354–360.
   Google Scholar
• Singh VK, Barman C, Tandon R. 2014. Nectar robbing positively influences the reproductive success of Tecomella undulata (Bignoniaceae). PLoS One. 9:e102607.
   Google Scholar
• Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. 1995. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. New York (USA): WH Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Stout JC, Allen JA, Goulson D. 2000. Nectar robbing, forager efficiency and seed set: bumblebees foraging on the self-incompatible plant Linaria vulgaris (Scrophulariaceae). Acta Oecologica. 21:277–283.
   Google Scholar
• Urcelay C, Morales CL, Chalcoff VR. 2006. Relationship between corolla length and floral larceny in the South American hummingbird-pollinated Campsidium valdivianum (Bignoniaceae). Ann. Bot. Fenn. 43:205–211.
   Google Scholar
• Utelli AB, Roy BA. 2001. Causes and consequences of floral damage in Aconitum lycoctonum at high and low elevations in Switzerland. Oecologia. 127:266–273.
   Google Scholar
• Valdivia CE, Carroza JP, Orellana JI. 2016. Geographic distribution and trait-mediated causes of nectar robbing by the European bumblebee Bombus terrestris on the Patagonian shrub Fuchsia magellanica. Flora. 225:30–36.
   Google Scholar
• Valdivia CE, Orellana JI, Morales-Paredes C. 2018. Ant-mediated nectar robbing from the Chilean firetree Embothrium coccineum (Proteaceae): no effect on seed production. Ann. Bot. Fenn. 55:217–226.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang YW, Robert GW, Wang Y, Guo Y-H. 2007. Nectar robbing of a carpenter bee and its effects on the reproductive fitness of Glechoma longituba (Lamiaceae). Plant Ecol. 193:1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang YW, Yang CF, Zhao JM, Guo YH. 2009b. Selective nectar robbing in a gynodioecious plant (Glechoma longituba) enhances female advantage. J Evol Biol. 22:527–535.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Y-W, Yu Q, Zhao J-M, Guo Y-H. 2009a. Differential effects of nectar robbing by the same bumble-bee species on three sympatric Corydalis species with varied mating systems. Ann Bot. 104:33–39.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang YW, Zhao JM, Yang CF, Gituru WR. 2011. Behavioural differences between male and female carpenter bees in nectar robbing and its effect on reproductive success in Glechoma longituba (Lamiaceae). Plant Biol. 13:25–32.
   Google Scholar