Synchronous flowering

Last updated

Flowering synchrony is the amount of overlap between flowering periods of plants in their mating season compared to what would be expected to occur randomly under given environmental conditions. [1] A population which is flowering synchronously has more plants flowering (producing pollen or receiving pollen) at the same time than would be expected to occur randomly. A population which is flowering asynchronously has fewer plants flowering at the same time than would be expected randomly. Flowering synchrony can describe synchrony of flowering periods within a year, across years, and across species in a community. There are fitness benefits and disadvantages to synchronized flowering, and it is a widespread phenomenon across pollination syndromes.

Contents

History

Synchronous flowering has been observed in nature for centuries. Sources from the ninth and 10th centuries noted the interannual synchrony of bamboo species. [2] Early scholarly work focused on interannual variation in the form of mast seeding in tree species such as pines and oaks. An early proposed explanation for masting was the resource management (or weather tracking) hypothesis. [3] This suggested that trees produced large amounts of seeds in response to favorable resource availability and weather conditions. Subsequent research has shown that while weather and resource availability may act as proximate mechanisms for interannually synchronized flowering, the ultimate driver is adaptive evolution for increased mating opportunities. [3]

Early studies of synchronous flowering were biased towards trees species, which typically exhibit higher within-year synchrony than herbaceous species. [4] The field has since expanded to include more herbaceous species. Researchers have also begun to investigate biotic drivers of synchrony, such as pollinating mutualists and herbivorous antagonists.

Community and global patterns of flowering synchrony are emerging across species. Such broad patterns are prone to disturbance by anthropogenic change such as global warming and the introduction of invasive species. Little has been done to examine synchrony across plant functional groups [4] (i.e. trees and herbaceous annuals and perennials), though differences in pollination syndromes complicate such analyses. More work is needed to understand how global shifts in flowering plant communities will reshape ecosystems.

Scales of synchrony

Synchronous flowering can occur across a season (intrannual synchrony) or across multiple years (interannual synchrony) within a species, or across coflowering species in a community. Populations and communities can exhibit multiple types of synchrony simultaneously.[ citation needed ]

Within-year synchrony

The synchrony of a population of flowering plants can be described within a season by how many plants are flowering at given points in time, and the distributions of individuals’ flowering start and end dates. More synchronized populations have lower variances for the period of time during which individuals are flowering. The point in time at which the most plants in a population are flowering is commonly described as “peak flowering.”

When more plants are flowering simultaneously, there are more mates and mating opportunities available for individual plants. Self-incompatible plants, which constitute about half of all flowering plants, [5] must outcross in order to reproduce. Within-season synchrony can increase the probability of successful outcrossing by donating pollen to, or receiving pollen from, a viable mate. [6] In the case of wind-pollinated Juncus rushes, which exhibit multiple flowering pulses in a season, synchronized flowering allows plants to hedge their bets on the population experiencing appropriate environmental conditions for reproduction during at least one of the pulses. [7]

Across-year synchrony

In plant species which flower every year, complete across-year synchrony has been achieved. Plants which do not flower every year can achieve varying degrees of synchrony. Resource consumption can dictate how frequently a dioecious or gynoecious plant flowers, as producing seeds is a significant resource investment. When a plant flowers asynchronously in a year in which few other individuals are flowering, it has few mating opportunities. [8] Plants which are not well-pollinated do not invest much in seed production, which can allow them to flower again in a short time. [9] This can re-synchronize individuals, because when they are well-pollinated and invest energy into seed production, they have limited resources to invest in flowering the following year.[ citation needed ]

Some species have highly canalized synchronous flowering cycles. Many bamboo species exhibit synchronous flowering return intervals, with some as long as 120 years. A proposed mechanism demonstrated that such extreme intervals can arise as a mutation and spread in a population when they align with the ancestral interval. [2] For example, a plant with a mutation to flower every four years has many mating opportunities if it cycles with a population that flowers every two years, allowing the mutant to reproduce and pass on the four-year trait. Phylogenetic methods can reveal how across-year synchrony evolved in populations.

Community synchrony

Evidence for community synchrony is mixed and requires phylogenetic analyses to determine that synchrony is not simply a product of relatedness among co-occurring species. [4] [10] [11] For plants with pollinator-mediated reproduction, plants with similar pollination syndromes may establish together where there are appropriate pollinators available, by a process called filtering. [12] [13] [14] Plants species which share pollinators are likely to flower synchronously, and the presence of a coflowering species can facilitate pollination in a species. [10] However, it is unclear whether group selection can act on a community to drive the evolution of synchrony in multiple species. Synchronously-flowering species in a community may evolve other divergent traits to avoid competition and prevent the transfer of heterospecific pollen. [11] [15]

Because overlap in flowering times can lead to pollinators maintaining site fidelity, [16] there could be selection for overlapping, but not synchronous flowering in a community. Synchronously flowering species can also drive the evolution of longer flowering periods due to increased heterospecific pollen transfer, [17] which could result in more synchronous flowering simply by sharing more overlapping days.

More work is needed to determine whether species’ flowering synchrony can evolve due to the composition of the community they inhabit. Under similar biotic and abiotic drivers of synchrony, species in a community have the potential to undergo parallel evolution; to determine this, the plasticity of synchrony under different environmental conditions must be extricated from the heritable variation in phenological traits.[ citation needed ]

Coevolution with animals

Coevolution can shape the trajectory of evolution for flowering synchrony in plants. Nearly 90% of flowering plants rely on animals for pollination services, [18] and many plants rely on frugivorous animals to disperse seeds. Because plants cannot escape predators, they are also subject to herbivory and seed predation. These pressures can shape the evolution of synchrony.

Pollinators

Coevolution with pollinators has the potential to drive synchronous or asynchronous flowering. Pollination by a specialist can result in high flowering synchrony, as asynchronous flowering can result in erratic attraction of a specialist to a site. [19] Showy floral displays tend to attract pollinators, [20] [21] and synchronous flowering can attract more pollinators to a population. High pollinator visitation to populations with high flowering synchrony can result in high outcrossing rates and increased seed set through a process called facilitation. [19] [22] However, when many plants are flowering, per-plant pollinator visitation may be reduced. [23] There is a potential fitness benefit to asynchronous flowering when it results in reduced competition for pollinators and increased pollinator visitation. When pollinator attraction keeps pace with floral abundance, this is not a concern. [24] [25] Asynchronous flowering can also result in gene flow over greater distances, which can combat inbreeding due to spatial autocorrelation in populations of plants with seeds which do not disperse lengthy distances. [24]

Herbivores

Predator satiation is a mechanism commonly thought to drive the evolution of masting (the result of across-year flowering synchrony) as well as within-year flowering synchrony. Predator satiation is particularly well-studied in trees species. When populations produce a large crop of seeds, seed predation is lower because the quantity of available food overwhelms the capacity of granivores to eat. This has been demonstrated in many systems, and is an effective evolutionary strategy when the production of large quantities of seeds is more efficient for an organism than producing a small quantity (in line with the economy of scale [3] ). It is also a more effective strategy when coupled with within-year flowering synchrony. [26] Within-year synchrony can be driven by mutualist herbivores as well as antagonistic ones. [27] Different kinds of seed predators can place differing evolutionary pressures on flowering plants; rodents and insects may eat the same seeds, but in different quantities and at different times, providing a challenging adaptive landscape for species to navigate.[ citation needed ]

Herbivores can drive selection for asynchrony, and asynchrony can result in lower predation. [28] [24] For plants which rely on predators to disperse seeds (e.g. frugivores), asynchrony is beneficial for precisely the reason why it is disadvantageous for plants under pressure from granivores. [3] An asynchronously-flowering plant’s fruits are more likely to be carried off and consumed due to low resource availability for frugivores, which can result in dispersal from the maternal plant and reduced competition for resources like light and water between parents and offspring.

Abiotic cues

A degree of within-season synchrony is expected for populations and communities due to the Moran effect, which posits that the degree of differentiation in phenology between populations is comparable to the differentiation in environmental conditions. The Moran effect plays a role in flowering synchrony. [29] Abiotic factors like moisture, [19] day length [30] and temperature [27] can trigger flowering. Wind-pollinated species exhibit may flower in conjunction with trade winds to take advantage of more effective pollination conditions. [31] Determining the degree to which within-year flowering synchrony is a consequence of the constraints of abiotic resource availability versus an evolved trait with fitness benefits is a field of research requiring further work.[ citation needed ]

Abiotic drivers of across-year synchrony has been investigated more thoroughly, as many early studies of flowering synchrony were concerned with determining the role of abiotic cues in interannual flowering synchrony. Abiotic cues which trigger within-season synchrony are frequently correlated with across-year synchrony as well. Abiotic cues seem to act as a proximate driver of synchrony which has ultimate evolutionary benefits. [3] Variation in microclimate associated with poor growing conditions can result in more asynchronous reproduction across a population. [32]

Some global patterns of community flowering synchrony have been identified. In ecosystems which experience distinct growing seasons and winters, flowering time is limited to periods with adequate temperature and light. This results in community synchrony simply due to the fact that plants may be physiologically incapable of flowering in the dead of winter. [4] In the high latitudes of the tropics, where plant communities are not constrained by unfavorable weather, flowering times could diverge due to selective or pressures or simply because of genetic drift. [33] In addition to these patterns, plants at lower latitudes more frequently exhibit interannual flowering synchrony. [3]

Abiotic disturbance can drive the evolution of synchrony.  Irregularly disturbed environments can result in the evolution of asynchronous reproduction, which is more robust to catastrophic damage to a population. [34] However, disturbance which occurs more regularly and poses a more reliable selective pressure on species can drive synchrony. Flowering in the prairie plant Echinacea angustifolia is more synchronized after fire, once a common feature of the tallgrass prairie ecosystem. [6]

Speciation

Divergent patterns of flowering synchrony can result in speciation, and asynchronous flowering can prevent hybridization. [35] By occupying different niches in flowering time, sympatric speciation can occur. This is the case in bamboo species with multiplicative across-year flowering intervals. [2] The unrestricted growing season of the tropics may allow for speciation due to shifts in flowering periods, [33] especially where microclimate variation among metapopulations exist. Asynchronous reproduction between congeners can be maintained by differential responses to abiotic cues, preventing hybridization. [36] Dramatic environmental disturbance could disrupt the interannual flowering period of a large portion of a population, resulting in a temporally isolated population which could potentially evolve into a distinct species. [37] Flowering synchrony could shift and evolve in concert with novel mutualist pollinator or antagonistic predator, resulting in speciation, though this has not been empirically demonstrated.

Conservation concerns

Fragmented populations

Asynchronously flowering species are at particular risk for extinction following habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation can reduce the population of available mates due to population size reduction and the creation of insurmountable barriers to pollinator movement. In an asynchronously-reproducing population, this can isolate individuals in time and result in no mating opportunities. [38] The loss of mutualist frugivores (particularly vertebrates) due to habitat reduction can also decrease selective pressure for asynchronous reproduction. This is also a possibility for pollinators, particularly specialists. Community synchrony has the potential to increase as asynchronously-flowering species are filtered out by local extinction due to lack of available mates. Synchrony may also increase as the facultative benefits of large floral displays to attract pollinators due to decreased floral displays at the species level. [39] Habitat fragmentation increases edge effects in populations, potentially creating greater microclimate variation and decreasing synchrony due to uneven abiotic cues. [40]

Invasive species

The presence of invasive species can alter the degree of synchrony in a population. In one example, the presence of an invasive species increased community synchrony. [12] While this can increase the floral display and attractiveness of a patch to pollinators, invasive plants can act as competitors if they are more attractive than native coflowering species. A study found that plant communities assembled with a high diversity of differently-colored flowers, potentially to avoid competition for pollinators attracted to particular colors in floral displays. The presence of an invasive plant in this community decreased the overdispersion of color diversity. [15] Invasive plants can drive evolution in the floral traits of native congeners; [41] coevolution with both an invasive congener and a mutual pollinator of the two species could result in evolving synchrony between them. However, the attractiveness of invasive floral displays can also result in facilitation of pollination in a native species. [42] Invasive species can take advantage of an unoccupied flowering niche. If the flowering period of the invader is entirely unoccupied by native species, the invader may monopolize pollinator activity and will decrease community synchrony. [43]

Climate change

Climate change can shift synchronous plant phenology by changing the timing of abiotic factors which cue flowering, but it can also drive asynchrony. [44] By reshaping the phenology of coevolved animal species, climate change has the potential to disrupt selection for reproductive synchrony. [45] In one example, a plant’s flowering phenology and its seed-dispersing ant mutualist’s phenology are both triggered by temperature cues. [27] Because the plant’s phenology is more prone to change under a new climate regime than the ant’s, the plant is decoupled from the selective pressure for flowering synchrony that the ant mutualism imposes. Insects appear to have less plastic or adaptive responses to advanced warming, [45] which can result in the loss of mutualisms. One study estimated that under climate warming 17-50% of pollinator species in the study would have their host plants disrupted. [46] Though shifting phenology could result in the loss of mutualisms for plants, some biotically-pollinated plants which have undergone phenological advancement due to the warming climate appear to have established new mutualisms with appropriately-timed pollinators and do not suffer from decreased reproductive output. [47]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mutualism (biology)</span> Mutually beneficial interaction between species

Mutualism describes the ecological interaction between two or more species where each species has a net benefit. Mutualism is a common type of ecological interaction, one that can come from a parasitic interaction. Prominent examples include most vascular plants engaged in mutualistic interactions with mycorrhizae, flowering plants being pollinated by animals, vascular plants being dispersed by animals, and corals with zooxanthellae, among many others. Mutualism can be contrasted with interspecific competition, in which each species experiences reduced fitness, and exploitation, or parasitism, in which one species benefits at the expense of the other.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pollinator</span> Animal that moves pollen from the male anther of a flower to the female stigma

A pollinator is an animal that moves pollen from the male anther of a flower to the female stigma of a flower. This helps to bring about fertilization of the ovules in the flower by the male gametes from the pollen grains.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Coevolution</span> Two or more species influencing each others evolution

In biology, coevolution occurs when two or more species reciprocally affect each other's evolution through the process of natural selection. The term sometimes is used for two traits in the same species affecting each other's evolution, as well as gene-culture coevolution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pollination</span> Biological process occurring in plants

Pollination is the transfer of pollen from an anther of a plant to the stigma of a plant, later enabling fertilisation and the production of seeds, most often by an animal or by wind. Pollinating agents can be animals such as insects, for example beetles; birds, butterflies, and bats; water; wind; and even plants themselves. Pollinating animals travel from plant to plant carrying pollen on their bodies in a vital interaction that allows the transfer of genetic material critical to the reproductive system of most flowering plants. When self-pollination occurs within a closed flower. Pollination often occurs within a species. When pollination occurs between species, it can produce hybrid offspring in nature and in plant breeding work.

<i>Heliconia</i> Genus of plants

Heliconia is a genus of flowering plants in the monotypic family Heliconiaceae. Most of the ca 194 known species are native to the tropical Americas, but a few are indigenous to certain islands of the western Pacific and Maluku in Indonesia. Many species of Heliconia are found in the tropical forests of these regions. Most species are listed as either vulnerable or data deficient by the IUCN Red List of threatened species. Several species are widely cultivated as ornamentals, and a few are naturalized in Florida, Gambia, and Thailand.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sequential hermaphroditism</span> Sex change as part of the normal life cycle of a species

Sequential hermaphroditism is one of the two types of hermaphroditism, the other type being simultaneous hermaphroditism. It occurs when the organism's sex changes at some point in its life. In particular, a sequential hermaphrodite produces eggs and sperm at different stages in life. Sequential hermaphroditism occurs in many fish, gastropods, and plants. Species that can undergo these changes do so as a normal event within their reproductive cycle, usually cued by either social structure or the achievement of a certain age or size. In some species of fish, sequential hermaphroditism is much more common than simultaneous hermaphroditism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zoophily</span> Pollination by animals

Zoophily, or zoogamy, is a form of pollination whereby pollen is transferred by animals, usually by invertebrates but in some cases vertebrates, particularly birds and bats, but also by other animals. Zoophilous species frequently have evolved mechanisms to make themselves more appealing to the particular type of pollinator, e.g. brightly colored or scented flowers, nectar, and appealing shapes and patterns. These plant-animal relationships are often mutually beneficial because of the food source provided in exchange for pollination.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flower</span> Reproductive structure in flowering plants

A flower, also known as a bloom or blossom, is the reproductive structure found in flowering plants. Flowers consist of a combination of vegetative organs – sepals that enclose and protect the developing flower, petals that attract pollinators, and reproductive organs that produce gametophytes, which in flowering plants produce gametes. The male gametophytes, which produce sperm, are enclosed within pollen grains produced in the anthers. The female gametophytes are contained within the ovules produced in the carpels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ornithophily</span> Pollination by birds

Ornithophily or bird pollination is the pollination of flowering plants by birds. This sometimes coevolutionary association is derived from insect pollination (entomophily) and is particularly well developed in some parts of the world, especially in the tropics, Southern Africa, and on some island chains. The association involves several distinctive plant adaptations forming a "pollination syndrome". The plants typically have colourful, often red, flowers with long tubular structures holding ample nectar and orientations of the stamen and stigma that ensure contact with the pollinator. Birds involved in ornithophily tend to be specialist nectarivores with brushy tongues and long bills, that are either capable of hovering flight or light enough to perch on the flower structures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mast (botany)</span> Fruit of forest trees like acorns and other nuts

Mast is the fruit of forest trees and shrubs, such as acorns and other nuts. The term derives from the Old English mæst, meaning the nuts of forest trees that have accumulated on the ground, especially those used historically for fattening domestic pigs, and as food resources for wildlife. In the aseasonal tropics of Southeast Asia, entire forests, including hundreds of species of trees and shrubs, are known to mast at irregular periods of 2–12 years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pollination syndrome</span> Flower traits that attract pollinators

Pollination syndromes are suites of flower traits that have evolved in response to natural selection imposed by different pollen vectors, which can be abiotic or biotic, such as birds, bees, flies, and so forth through a process called pollinator-mediated selection. These traits include flower shape, size, colour, odour, reward type and amount, nectar composition, timing of flowering, etc. For example, tubular red flowers with copious nectar often attract birds; foul smelling flowers attract carrion flies or beetles, etc.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chasmogamy</span> Flowers with exposed reproductive parts

Chasmogamy is the type of plant reproduction in which the flowers open up, enabling cross-pollination. This is in contrast to cleistogamy, in which the flowers stay closed and self-pollinate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Predator satiation</span> Anti-predator adaption

Predator satiation is an anti-predator adaptation in which prey briefly occur at high population densities, reducing the probability of an individual organism being eaten. When predators are flooded with potential prey, they can consume only a certain amount, so by occurring at high densities prey benefit from a safety in numbers effect. This strategy has evolved in a diverse range of prey, including notably many species of plants, insects, and fish. Predator satiation can be considered a type of refuge from predators.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecological speciation</span>

Ecological speciation is a form of speciation arising from reproductive isolation that occurs due to an ecological factor that reduces or eliminates gene flow between two populations of a species. Ecological factors can include changes in the environmental conditions in which a species experiences, such as behavioral changes involving predation, predator avoidance, pollinator attraction, and foraging; as well as changes in mate choice due to sexual selection or communication systems. Ecologically-driven reproductive isolation under divergent natural selection leads to the formation of new species. This has been documented in many cases in nature and has been a major focus of research on speciation for the past few decades.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Floral scent</span>

Floral scent, or flower scent, is composed of all the volatile organic compounds (VOCs), or aroma compounds, emitted by floral tissue. Other names for floral scent include, aroma, fragrance, floral odour or perfume. Flower scent of most flowering plant species encompasses a diversity of VOCs, sometimes up to several hundred different compounds. The primary functions of floral scent are to deter herbivores and especially folivorous insects, and to attract pollinators. Floral scent is one of the most important communication channels mediating plant-pollinator interactions, along with visual cues.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monocotyledon reproduction</span> Flowering plant reproduction system

The monocots are one of the two major groups of flowering plants, the other being the dicots. In order to reproduce they utilize various strategies such as employing forms of asexual reproduction, restricting which individuals they are sexually compatible with, or influencing how they are pollinated. Nearly all reproductive strategies that evolved in the dicots have independently evolved in monocots as well. Despite these similarities and their close relatedness, monocots and dicots have distinct traits in their reproductive biologies.

Allochronic speciation is a form of speciation arising from reproductive isolation that occurs due to a change in breeding time that reduces or eliminates gene flow between two populations of a species. The term allochrony is used to describe the general ecological phenomenon of the differences in phenology that arise between two or more species—speciation caused by allochrony is effectively allochronic speciation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pollinator-mediated selection</span> Process in which pollenators effects a plants evolution

Pollinator-mediated selection is an evolutionary process occurring in flowering plants, in which the foraging behavior of pollinators differentially selects for certain floral traits. Flowering plant are a diverse group of plants that produce seeds. Their seeds differ from those of gymnosperms in that they are enclosed within a fruit. These plants display a wide range of diversity when it comes to the phenotypic characteristics of their flowers, which attracts a variety of pollinators that participate in biotic interactions with the plant. Since many plants rely on pollen vectors, their interactions with them influence floral traits and also favor efficiency since many vectors are searching for floral rewards like pollen and nectar. Examples of pollinator-mediated selected traits could be those involving the size, shape, color and odor of flowers, corolla tube length and width, size of inflorescence, floral rewards and amount, nectar guides, and phenology. Since these types of traits are likely to be involved in attracting pollinators, they may very well be the result of selection by the pollinators themselves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monoecy</span> Sexual system in seed plants

Monoecy is a sexual system in seed plants where separate male and female cones or flowers are present on the same plant. It is a monomorphic sexual system comparable with gynomonoecy, andromonoecy and trimonoecy, and contrasted with dioecy where individual plants produce cones or flowers of only one sex.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pollen theft</span> Net removal of pollen by an animal

Pollen theft, also known as pollen robbery or floral larceny, occurs when an animal actively eats or collects pollen from a plant species but provides little or no pollination in return. Pollen theft was named as a concept at least as early as the 1980, and examples have been documented well before that. For example, native honey bees were documented 'stealing' large amounts of pollen from the large, bat-pollinated flowers of Parkia clappertoniana in Ghana in the 1950s. Nevertheless, pollen theft has typically received far less research attention than nectar robbing, despite the more direct consequences on plant reproduction.

References

  1. ↑ Ims, Rolf (1990). "The ecology and evolution of reproductive synchrony". Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 5 (5): 135–140. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(90)90218-3. PMID   21232341.
  2. 1 2 3 Veller, Carl; Nowak, Martin A.; Davis, Charles C. (2015). "Extended flowering intervals of bamboos evolved by discrete multiplication". Ecology Letters. 18 (7): 653–659. doi:10.1111/ele.12442. PMID   25963600.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kelly, Dave; Sork, Victoria L. (2002-11-01). "Mast Seeding in Perennial Plants: Why, How, Where?". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 33 (1): 427–447. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.020602.095433. ISSN   0066-4162.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Nagahama, Ai; Yahara, Tetsukazu (2019). "Quantitative comparison of flowering phenology traits among trees, perennial herbs, and annuals in a temperate plant community". American Journal of Botany. 106 (12): 1545–1557. doi:10.1002/ajb2.1387. ISSN   0002-9122. PMC   6973048 . PMID   31724169.
  5. ↑ Igic, Boris; Kohn, Joshua R. (2006). "The distribution of plant mating systems: Study bias against obligatey outcrossing species". Evolution. 60 (5): 1098–1103. doi:10.1554/05-383.1. PMID   16817548. S2CID   40964.
  6. 1 2 Wagenius, Stuart; Beck, Jared; Kiefer, Gretel (2020-02-11). "Fire synchronizes flowering and boosts reproduction in a widespread but declining prairie species". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (6): 3000–3005. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1907320117 . ISSN   0027-8424. PMC   7022177 . PMID   31988124.
  7. ↑ Michalski, Stefan G.; Durka, Walter (2007). "Synchronous Pulsed Flowering: Analysis of the Flowering Phenology in Juncus (Juncaceae)". Annals of Botany. 100 (6): 1271–1285. doi:10.1093/aob/mcm206. ISSN   1095-8290. PMC   2759248 . PMID   17881343.
  8. ↑ Waananen, Amy; Kiefer, Gretel; Ison, Jennifer L.; Wagenius, Stuart (2018). "Mating Opportunity Increases with Synchrony of Flowering among Years More than Synchrony within Years in a Nonmasting Perennial". The American Naturalist. 192 (3): 379–388. doi:10.1086/698657. ISSN   0003-0147. PMID   30125234. S2CID   52050807.
  9. ↑ Crone, Elizabeth E.; Miller, Elizabeth; Sala, Anna (2009). "How do plants know when other plants are flowering? Resource depletion, pollen limitation and mast-seeding in a perennial wildflower". Ecology Letters. 12 (11): 1119–1126. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01365.x. ISSN   1461-0248. PMID   19725864.
  10. 1 2 Bergamo, Pedro J.; Streher, Nathalia S.; Wolowski, Marina; Sazima, Marlies (2020). "Pollinator-mediated facilitation is associated with floral abundance, trait similarity and enhanced community-level fitness". Journal of Ecology. 108 (4): 1334–1346. doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13348. hdl: 10261/226401 . S2CID   214146313.
  11. 1 2 Bergamo, Pedro Joaquim; Wolowski, Marina; Maruyama, Pietro Kiyoshi; Vizentin-Bugoni, Jeferson; Sazima, Marlies (2018). "Trait patterns across space and time suggest an interplay of facilitation and competition acting on Neotropical hummingbird-pollinated plant communities". Oikos. 127 (11): 1690–1700. doi:10.1111/oik.05571. S2CID   90857143.
  12. 1 2 Dante, Sneha K.; Schamp, Brandon S.; Aarssen, Lonnie W. (2013). Knapp, Alan (ed.). "Evidence of deterministic assembly according to flowering time in an old‐field plant community". Functional Ecology. 27 (2): 555–564. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.12061 . ISSN   0269-8463.
  13. ↑ Arceo-Gómez, Gerardo; Kaczorowski, Rainee L.; Ashman, Tia Lynn (2018). "A network approach to understanding patterns of coflowering in diverse communities". International Journal of Plant Sciences. 179 (7): 569–582. doi:10.1086/698712. S2CID   91975466.
  14. ↑ Sargent, Risa D.; Ackerly, David D. (2008). "Plant–pollinator interactions and the assembly of plant communities". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 23 (3): 123–130. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.11.003. PMID   18262307.
  15. 1 2 Makino, Takashi T.; Yokoyama, Jun (2015-12-09). Huang, Shuang-Quan (ed.). "Nonrandom Composition of Flower Colors in a Plant Community: Mutually Different Co-Flowering Natives and Disturbance by Aliens". PLOS ONE. 10 (12): e0143443. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1043443M. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143443 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   4674055 . PMID   26650121.
  16. ↑ Ogilvie, Jane E.; Thomson, James D. (2016). "Site fidelity by bees drives pollination facilitation in sequentially blooming plant species". Ecology. 97 (6): 1442–1451. doi:10.1890/15-0903.1. ISSN   1939-9170. PMID   27459775.
  17. ↑ Arceo-Gómez, Gerardo; Ashman, Tia-Lynn (2014-02-01). "Coflowering Community Context Influences Female Fitness and Alters the Adaptive Value of Flower Longevity in Mimulus guttatus". The American Naturalist. 183 (2): E50–E63. doi:10.1086/674358. ISSN   0003-0147. PMID   24464206. S2CID   23454183.
  18. ↑ Ollerton, Jeff; Winfree, Rachael; Tarrant, Sam (2011). "How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals?". Oikos. 120 (3): 321–326. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18644.x.
  19. 1 2 3 Augspurger, Carol K. (1981). "Reproductive Synchrony of a Tropical Shrub: Experimental Studies on Effects of Pollinators and Seed Predators in Hybanthus Prunifolius (Violaceae)". Ecology. 62 (3): 775–788. doi:10.2307/1937745. ISSN   0012-9658. JSTOR   1937745.
  20. ↑ Hegland, Stein J.; Boeke, Lucas (2006). "Relationships between the density and diversity of floral resources and flower visitor activity in a temperate grassland community". Ecological Entomology. 31 (5): 532–538. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2311.2006.00812.x. ISSN   0307-6946. S2CID   84267668.
  21. ↑ Delnevo, Nicola; Etten, Eddie J.; Byrne, Margaret; Stock, William D. (2019). "Floral display and habitat fragmentation: Effects on the reproductive success of the threatened mass‐flowering Conospermum undulatum (Proteaceae)". Ecology and Evolution. 9 (19): 11494–11503. doi:10.1002/ece3.5653. ISSN   2045-7758. PMC   6802041 . PMID   31641488.
  22. ↑ Rodríguez-Pérez, Javier; Traveset, Anna (2016-02-02). "Effects of flowering phenology and synchrony on the reproductive success of a long-flowering shrub". AoB Plants. 8: plw007. doi: 10.1093/aobpla/plw007 . ISSN   2041-2851. PMC   4793561 . PMID   26839285.
  23. ↑ Wagenius, Stuart; Lyon, Stephanie Pimm (2010). "Reproduction of Echinacea angustifolia in fragmented prairie is pollen-limited but not pollinator-limited". Ecology. 91 (3): 733–742. doi:10.1890/08-1375.1. ISSN   0012-9658. PMID   20426332.
  24. 1 2 3 Elzinga JA, Atlan A, Biere A, Gigord L, Weis AE, Bernasconi G. (2007) Time after time: Flowering phenology and biotic interactions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 22(8). doi : 10.1016/j.tree.2007.05.006
  25. ↑ Ye, Zhong-Ming; Dai, Wen-Kui; Jin, Xiao-Fang; Gituru, Rober W.; Wang, Qing-Feng; Yang, Chun-Feng (2014-01-01). "Competition and facilitation among plants for pollination: can pollinator abundance shift the plant–plant interactions?". Plant Ecology. 215 (1): 3–13. doi:10.1007/s11258-013-0274-y. ISSN   1573-5052. S2CID   16759843.
  26. ↑ Bogdziewicz, Michał; Szymkowiak, Jakub; Tanentzap, Andrew J.; Calama, Rafael; Marino, Shealyn; Steele, Michael A.; Seget, Barbara; Piechnik, Łukasz; Żywiec, Magdalena (2020-08-19). "Seed predation selects for reproductive variability and synchrony in perennial plants". New Phytologist. 229 (4): 2357–2364. doi: 10.1111/nph.16835 . ISSN   0028-646X. PMC   7891628 . PMID   32744333.
  27. 1 2 3 Warren, Robert J.; Bahn, Volker; Bradford, Mark A. (2011). "Temperature cues phenological synchrony in ant-mediated seed dispersal". Global Change Biology. 17 (7): 2444–2454. Bibcode:2011GCBio..17.2444W. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02386.x. S2CID   85876554.
  28. ↑ Gomez, J. M. (1993). Phenotypic Selection on Flowering Synchrony in a High Mountain Plant, Hormathophylla Spinosa (Cruciferae), 81(4), 605–613.
  29. ↑ Koenig, W. D., & Knopes, J. M. H. (2013). Large-scale spatial synchrony and cross-synchrony in acorn production by two California oaks. Ecology, 94(1), 83–93.
  30. ↑ Taiz, L.; Zeiger, E.; Møller, I.; Murphy, A. (2015). Plant Physiology and Development (6 ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc. ISBN   978-1-60535-353-1.
  31. ↑ Rathcke, B; Lacey, E P (1985). "Phenological Patterns of Terrestrial Plants". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 16 (1): 179–214. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.001143. ISSN   0066-4162. S2CID   37646596.
  32. ↑ Koenig, Walter D.; Knops, Johannes M. H.; Carmen, William J.; Pearse, Ian S. (2015). "What drives masting? The phenological synchrony hypothesis". Ecology. 96 (1): 184–192. doi:10.1890/14-0819.1. ISSN   0012-9658. PMID   26236903. S2CID   18480780.
  33. 1 2 Martin, P., Bonier, F., Moore, I., & Tweksbury, J. (2009). Latitudinal variation in the asynchrony of seasons: implications for higher rates of population differentiation and speciation in the tropics. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution, 2, 9–17. doi : 10.4033/iee.2009.2.3.n
  34. ↑ Post, Eric; Levin, Simon A.; Iwasa, Yoh; Stenseth, Nils C. (2001). "Reproductive asynchrony increases with environmental disturbance". Evolution. 55 (4): 830–834. doi:10.1554/0014-3820(2001)055[0830:raiwed]2.0.co;2. ISSN   0014-3820. PMID   11392400.
  35. ↑ Field, David L.; Ayre, David J.; Whelan, Robert J.; Young, Andrew G. (2011). "The importance of pre-mating barriers and the local demographic context for contemporary mating patterns in hybrid zones of Eucalyptus aggregata and Eucalyptus rubida: MATING PATTERNS IN EUCALYPTUS HYBRID ZONES". Molecular Ecology. 20 (11): 2367–2379. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05054.x. PMID   21375638. S2CID   29728379.
  36. ↑ Martin, Noland H.; Willis, John H. (January 2007). "Ecological divergence associated with mating system causes nearly complete reproductive isolation between sympatric Mimulus species". Evolution. 61 (1): 68–82. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00006.x. ISSN   0014-3820. PMID   17300428. S2CID   2318546.
  37. ↑ Franklin, D. C. (2004). Synchrony and asynchrony: observations and hypotheses for the flowering wave in a long-lived semelparous bamboo. Journal of Biogeography, 31, 773–786.
  38. ↑ Ison, Jennifer L.; Wagenius, Stuart (2014). "Both flowering time and distance to conspecific plants affect reproduction in Echinacea angustifolia, a common prairie perennial". Journal of Ecology. 102 (4): 920–929. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.12262 . ISSN   1365-2745.
  39. ↑ Moeller, D. A. (2004). Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators. Ecology, 85(12), 3289–3301.
  40. ↑ Xiao, Yian; Li, Xiaohong; Cao, Yusong; Dong, Ming (2016). "The diverse effects of habitat fragmentation on plant–pollinator interactions". Plant Ecology. 217 (7): 857–868. doi:10.1007/s11258-016-0608-7. ISSN   1385-0237. S2CID   15817996.
  41. ↑ Beans, Carolyn M.; Roach, Deborah A. (2015). "An invasive plant alters pollinator-mediated phenotypic selection on a native congener". American Journal of Botany. 102 (1): 50–57. doi: 10.3732/ajb.1400385 . ISSN   1537-2197. PMID   25587147.
  42. ↑ McKinney, Amy M.; Goodell, Karen (2011). "Plant–pollinator interactions between an invasive and native plant vary between sites with different flowering phenology". Plant Ecology. 212 (6): 1025–1035. doi:10.1007/s11258-010-9882-y. ISSN   1385-0237. S2CID   23451597.
  43. ↑ Godoy, O.; Castro-Díez, P.; Valladares, F.; Costa-Tenorio, M. (2009). "Different flowering phenology of alien invasive species in Spain: evidence for the use of an empty temporal niche?". Plant Biology. 11 (6): 803–811. doi:10.1111/j.1438-8677.2008.00185.x. hdl: 10261/89824 . PMID   19796357.
  44. ↑ Zohner, C. M., Mo, L., & Renner, S. S. (2018). Global warming reduces leaf-out and flowering synchrony among individuals. eLife, 7(e40214), 1–15.
  45. 1 2 Forrest, Jessica R. K.; Thomson, James D. (2011). "An examination of synchrony between insect emergence and flowering in Rocky Mountain meadows". Ecological Monographs. 81 (3): 469–491. doi: 10.1890/10-1885.1 . ISSN   0012-9615. S2CID   30251478.
  46. ↑ Memmott, Jane; Craze, Paul G.; Waser, Nickolas M.; Price, Mary V. (2007). "Global warming and the disruption of plant?pollinator interactions". Ecology Letters. 10 (8): 710–717. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01061.x. ISSN   1461-023X. PMID   17594426.
  47. ↑ Rafferty, Nicole E.; Ives, Anthony R. (2011). "Effects of experimental shifts in flowering phenology on plant-pollinator interactions: Experimental shifts in flowering phenology". Ecology Letters. 14 (1): 69–74. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01557.x. PMID   21078034.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.