Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractReconstructing week-long exposures to volatile organic compounds using physiologically based pharmacokinetic models    Next AbstractOn-site determination of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons in seawater by stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) and thermal desorption GC-MS »

Oecologia


Title:Olfactory versus visual cues in a floral mimicry system
Author(s):Roy BA; Raguso RA;
Address:"The Center For Population Biology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA, , , , , , US. Department of Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1048, USA, , , , , , US"
Journal Title:Oecologia
Year:1997
Volume:109
Issue:3
Page Number:414 - 426
DOI: 10.1007/s004420050101
ISSN/ISBN:1432-1939 (Electronic) 0029-8549 (Linking)
Abstract:"We used arrays of artificial flowers with and without fragrance to determine the importance of olfactory and visual cues in attracting insects to a floral mimic. The mimic is a fungus, Puccinia monoica Arth., which causes its crucifer hosts (here, Arabis drummondii Gray) to form pseudoflowers that mimic co-occurring flowers such as the buttercup, Ranunculus inamoenus Greene. Although pseudoflowers are visually similar to buttercups, their sweet fragrance is distinct. To determine whether visitors to pseudoflowers were responding to fragrance we performed an experiment in which we removed the visual cues, but allowed fragrance to still be perceived. In this experiment we found that pseudoflower fragrance can attract visitors by itself. In other experiments we found that the relative importance of olfactory and visual cues depended on the species of visitor. Halictid bees (Dialictus sp.) had a somewhat greater visual than olfactory response, whereas flies (muscids and anthomyiids) were more dependent on olfactory cues. We also used bioassays to determine which of the many compounds present in the natural fragrance were responsible for attraction. We found that halictid bees were equally attracted to pseudoflowers and to a blend containing phenylacetaldehyde, 2-phenylethanol, benzaldehyde and methylbenzoate in the same relative concentrations as in pseudoflowers. Flies, on the other hand, only responded to pseudoflower scent, indicating that we have not yet identified the compound(s) present in pseudoflowers that are attracting them. The ability of insects to differentiate pseudoflowers from true flowers by their fragrance may be important in the evolution of the mimicry system. Different fragrances may facilitate proper transfer of both fungal spermatia and pollen, and thus make it possible for the visual mimicry to evolve"
Keywords:Diptera Floral fragrance Key words Halictid bees Pollination ecology Rust fungi;
Notes:"PubMed-not-MEDLINERoy, B A Raguso, R A eng Germany 1997/02/01 Oecologia. 1997 Feb; 109(3):414-426. doi: 10.1007/s004420050101"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 06-07-2024