Abstract
Two closely related species ofCapparis, C. ovata andC. spinosa, which are exposed to the same pollination environment were studied. The nectar volume and concentration ofC. ovata are higher than inC. spinosa. Both species have similar pollination efficiency, but the relative contribution of each pollinator is different.C. ovata is pollinated mainly hy hawkmoths while the principal pollinators inC. spinosa are bees.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atlas of Israel, 1956, Jerusalem: The Jewish Agency.
Baker, H. G., Baker, I., 1973: Some anthecological aspects of the evolution of nectarproducing flowers, particularly amino acid production in nectar. InHeywood, V. H. (Ed.): Taxonomy and Evolution, pp. 243–264. — London: Academic Press.
—, 1983: Insects as flower visitors and pollinators. — Ann. Rev. Entomol.28, 407–453.
Baker, I., Baker, H. G., 1982: Some chemical constituents of floral nectars ofErythrina in relation to pollinators and systematics. — Allertonia3, 25–38.
Corbet, S. A., 1978: Bees and nectar ofEchium vulgare. — InRichards, A. J., (Ed.): The Pollination of Flowers by Insects, pp. 21–30. — New York: Academic Press.
Corbet, S. A., Unwin, D. M., Prŷs-Jones, O. E., 1979a: Humidity, nectar and insect visits to flowers with special references toCrataegus, Tilia andEchium. — Ecol. Entomol.4, 9–22.
-Willmer, P. G., Beament, J. W. L., Unwin, D. M., Prŷs-Jones, O. E., 1979b: Postsecretary determinants of sugar concentration in nectar. — Pl. Cell Environ., 293–308.
Cruden, R. W., Kinsman, S., Stockhouse, R. E., II.,Linhart, Y. B., 1976: Pollination, fecundity, and the distribution of moth-flowered plants. — Biotropica8, 204–210.
—, 1983; Patterns of nectar production and plant-pollinator coevolution. — In:Bentley, B., Elias, T. (Eds.): The Biology of Nectaries, pp. 80–125. — New York: Columbia University Press.
Eisikowitch, D., Galil, J., 1971: Effect of wind on the pollination ofPancratium maritimum L. (Amaryllidaceae) by hawkmoths (Lepidoptera, Sphingidae). — J. Anim. Ecol.40, 673–678.
—, 1986: Reward partitioning inCapparis spp. along ecological gradient. — Oecologia71, 47–50.
Miller, R. B., 1981; Hawkmoths and the geographic patterns of floral variation inAquilegia caerulea. — Evolution35, 763–774.
Shuel, R. W., 1955; Nectar secretion in relation to nitrogen supply, nutritional status, and growth of the plant. — Canad. J. Agr. Sci.35, 124–138.
Vogel, S., 1983; Ecophysiology of zoophilic pollination. — Encyclop. Pl. Physiol.12c, 560–624.
Willmer, P. G., 1980; The effect of insect visitors on nectar constituents in temperate plants. — Oecologia47, 270–277.
Yatom, S., Rivnay, I., 1967: Phenology of hawkmoths species in Israel. — Ketavim17, 57–72 (in Hebrew).
Zohary, M., 1966; Flora Palaestina I. — Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dafni, A., Eisikowitch, D. & Ivri, Y. Nectar flow and pollinators' efficiency in two co-occurring species ofCapparis (Capparaceae) in Israel. Pl Syst Evol 157, 181–186 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00936196
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00936196