• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • UA Faculty Research
    • UA Faculty Publications
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • UA Faculty Research
    • UA Faculty Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UA Campus RepositoryCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournal

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutUA Faculty PublicationsUA DissertationsUA Master's ThesesUA Honors ThesesUA PressUA YearbooksUA CatalogsUA Libraries

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Costs and benefits of alternative food handling tactics help explain facultative exploitation of pollination mutualisms

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    Lichtenberg_et_al-2018-Ecology.pdf
    Size:
    274.7Kb
    Format:
    PDF
    Description:
    Final Published Version
    Download
    Author
    Lichtenberg, Elinor M
    Irwin, Rebecca E
    Bronstein, Judith L
    Affiliation
    Univ Arizona, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol
    Issue Date
    2018-05-25
    Keywords
    Bombus
    cheating
    exploitation
    food handling tactics
    foraging
    mutualism
    nectar robbing
    pollination
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Publisher
    WILEY
    Citation
    Lichtenberg, E. M., Irwin, R. E., & Bronstein, J. L. (2018). Costs and benefits of alternative food handling tactics help explain facultative exploitation of pollination mutualisms. Ecology, 99(8), 1815-1824.
    Journal
    ECOLOGY
    Rights
    Copyright © 2018 by the Ecological Society of America.
    Collection Information
    This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.
    Abstract
    Many mutualisms are taken advantage of by organisms that take rewards from their partners but provide no benefit in return. In the absence of traits that limit exploitation, facultative exploiters (partners that can either exploit or cooperate) are widely predicted by mutualism theory to choose an exploitative strategy, potentially threatening mutualism stability. However, it is unknown whether facultative exploiters choose to exploit, and, if so, make this choice because it is the most beneficial strategy for them. We explored these questions in a subalpine plant‐insect community in which individuals of several bumble bee species visit flowers both “legitimately” (entering via the flower opening, picking up and depositing pollen, and hence behaving mutualistically) and via nectar robbing (creating holes through corollas or using an existing hole, bypassing stigmas and anthers). We applied foraging theory to (1) quantify handling costs, benefits and foraging efficiencies incurred by three bumble bee species as they visited flowers legitimately or robbed nectar in cage experiments, and (2) determine whether these efficiencies matched the food handling tactics these bee species employed in the field. Relative efficiencies of legitimate and robbing tactics depended on the combination of bee and plant species. In some cases (Bombus mixtus visiting Corydalis caseana or Mertensia ciliata), the robbing tactic permitted more efficient nectar removal. As both mutualism and foraging theory would predict, in the field, B. mixtus visiting C. caseana were observed more frequently robbing than foraging legitimately. However, for Bombus flavifrons visiting M. ciliata, the expectation from mutualism theory did not hold: legitimate visitation was the more efficient tactic. Legitimate visitation to M. ciliata was in fact more frequently observed in free‐flying B. flavifrons. Free‐flying B. mixtus also frequently visited M. ciliata flowers legitimately. This may reflect lower nectar volumes in robbed than unrobbed flowers in the field. These results suggest that a foraging ecology perspective is informative to the choice of tactics facultative exploiters make. In contrast, the simple expectation that exploiters should always have an advantage, and hence could threaten mutualism persistence unless they are deterred or punished, may not be broadly applicable.
    Note
    Open access article
    ISSN
    0012-9658
    PubMed ID
    29800495
    DOI
    10.1002/ecy.2395
    Version
    Final published version
    Sponsors
    National Science Foundation [DEB-1354061/1641243]
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1002/ecy.2395
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    UA Faculty Publications

    entitlement

    Related articles

    • 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.
    • Authors: Ye ZM, Jin XF, Wang QF, Yang CF, Inouye DW
    • Issue date: 2017 Apr 1
    • ALIEN BUMBLE BEE AFFECTS NATIVE PLANT REPRODUCTION THROUGH INTERACTIONS WITH NATIVE BUMBLE BEES.
    • Authors: Dohzono I, Kunitake YK, Yokoyama J, Goka K
    • Issue date: 2008 Nov
    • The behavioral ecology of nectar robbing: why be tactic constant?
    • Authors: Bronstein JL, Barker JL, Lichtenberg EM, Richardson LL, Irwin RE
    • Issue date: 2017 Jun
    • The Hole Truth: Why Do Bumble Bees Rob Flowers More Than Once?
    • Authors: Bronstein JL, Davidowitz G, Lichtenberg EM, Irwin RE
    • Issue date: 2024 Sep 6
    • Spatio-temporal variation of nectar robbing in Salvia gesneriflora and its effects on nectar production and legitimate visitors.
    • Authors: Cuevas E, Rosas-Guerrero V
    • Issue date: 2016 Jan
    The University of Arizona Libraries | 1510 E. University Blvd. | Tucson, AZ 85721-0055
    Tel 520-621-6442 | repository@u.library.arizona.edu
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.