Search

Made available in DSpace on 2022-04-28T19:52:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2022-03-18 Urbanization transforms environments in ways that alter biological evolution. We examined whether urban environmental change drives parallel evolution by sampling 110,019 white clover plants from 6169 populations in 160 cities globally. Plants were assayed for a Mendelian antiherbivore defense that also affects tolerance to abiotic stressors. Urban-rural gradients were associated with the evolution of clines in defense in 47% of cities throughout the world. Variation in the strength of clines was explained by environmental changes in drought stress and vegetation cover that varied among cities. Sequencing 2074 genomes from 26 cities revealed that the evolution of urban-rural clines was best explained by adaptive evolution, but the degree of parallel adaptation varied among cities. Our results demonstrate that urbanization leads to adaptation at a global scale. Department of Biology University of Toronto Mississauga ON Centre for Urban Environments University of Toronto Mississauga ON Department of Biology University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Department of Biology University of Louisiana LA Department of Biology Queen's University ON Department of Biology Concordia University QC Department of Biological Sciences DePaul University Department of Biology DePauw University IN Department of Urban Design and Planning, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales Universidad San Francisco de Quito USFQ Department of Genetics University of Georgia Department of Ecology and Genetics Evolutionary Biology Centre Uppsala University Field Science Center for Northern Biosphere Hokkaido University Natural History Museum Zoology University of New England NSW Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geografia da UFMT campus de Rondonópolis Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research Centre University of British Columbia Graduate Program in Genome Sciences and Technology Genome Sciences Centre University of British Columbia Department of Microbiology and Immunology University of British Columbia Red de Biología Evolutiva Instituto de Ecología A. C. School of the Environment Yale University CT Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas Universidad de Chile, Facultad de Ciencias Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad Universidad de Chile Department of Biology Mount Allison University Red de Ecoetología Instituto de Ecología A. C. Department of Biology University of Ottawa ON Department of Zoology University of Cambridge Department of Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA Department of Biology University of Miami FL Centro de Investigación en Recursos Naturales y Sustentabilidad (CIRENYS) Universidad Bernardo O'Higgins Department of Biology, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, USA Département des sciences du bois et de la forêt Université Laval QC Evolution & Ecology Research Centre School of Biological Earth and Environmental Sciences UNSW Sydney NSW Department of Biology Ghent University Department of Biology Monmouth University West Long Branch Centre for Ecology Evolution and Environmental Changes Faculdade de Ciências Universidade de Lisboa Lisboa Department of Biology KU Leuven School of Agriculture and Environment Wildlife and Ecology group Massey University, Palmerston North Department of Biological Sciences University of Cape Town Institute of Landscape Ecology University of Münster Gosnell School of Life Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA Department of Biological Sciences University of Alberta AB Louis Calder Center and Department of Biological Sciences, Fordham University, Armonk, NY, USA Departamento de Ecología Tropical, Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán, Mérida, Yucatán, México School of Life Sciences University of Sussex Department of Ecology Environment and Plant Sciences Stockholm University iBIOTROP Instituto de Biodiversidad Tropical Universidad San Francisco de Quito Department of Biology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, USA Unidad de Recursos Naturales, Centro de Investigación Científica de Yucatán AC, Mérida, Yucatán, México School of Ecological and Environmental Sciences East China Normal University Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Sustainable Plant Innovation Centre for Ecosystem Science School of Biological Earth and Environmental Sciences UNSW Sydney NSW Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Michigan MI Department of Biosciences Rice University TX IFEVA Universidad de Buenos Aires Facultad de Agronomía, CONICET Biology Department Saint Mary's University NS Department of Biological Sciences, Universidad de los Andes Department of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston TX Université de Rennes Department of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Centre University of British Columbia Department of Environmental Studies Dordt University Sioux Center IA Department of Biology Minneapolis Community and Technical College MN Department of Natural Sciences Ecology and Environment Research Centre Manchester Metropolitan University Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad UNAM Department of Botany School of Biology Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Faculty of Biological and Environmental Science Organismal & Evolutionary Biology Research Programme University of Helsinki Institute of Biodiversity Animal Health and Comparative Medicine University of Glasgow Department of Biology Hendrix College Department of Ecological Science Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja Departamento de Biologia Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) Department of Plant Sciences School of Biology College of Science University of Tehran NTNU University Museum Norwegian University of Science and Technology Red de Estudios Moleculares Avanzados Instituto de Ecología A. C. School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Whiteknights Park, Reading, Berkshire, UK Department of Biology Northern Arizona University AZ Department of Biological Sciences MacEwan University AB Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research Departamento de Ecología Evolutiva Instituto de Ecología Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology Potsdam-Golm BIO5 Institute University of Arizona AZ Alaska Center for Conservation Science University of Alaska Anchorage Tropical Diversity, Royal Botanical Garden of Edinburgh Département de biologie Université de Moncton Department of Biological Sciences University of Manitoba MB Departments of Microbiology & Statistics University of Manitoba MB Department of Biology University of New Brunswick Department of Biology Kalamazoo College MI BioProtection Research Centre Lincoln University Departamento de Ciencias Facultad de Artes Liberales Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez Department of Ecology Evolution Behaviour University of Minnesota MN Department of Biological Sciences Brock University Department of Environmental Toxicology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA ICB - University of Talca School of Molecular and Life Science Curtin University College of Science Health Engineering and Education Murdoch University, Murdoch School of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Sydney NSW School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia Department of Biological Sciences Wayne State University MI Department of Biology Western Oregon University, OR School of Natural Resources and the Environment University of Arizona AZ Departamento de Ecología Humana, Cinvestav Mérida Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas y Departamento de Ecología y Biodiversidad Facultad de Ciencias de la Vida, Universidad Andrés Bello Institute of Ecology and Biodiversity (IEB) Department of Biology Lund University Department of Biology Norwegian University of Science and Technology Escuela Superiro de Desarrollo Sustentable Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero -CONACYT Clarkson Secondary School Peel District School Board ON Homelands Sr. Public School Peel District School Board ON Department of Biological Sciences University of Illinois at Chicago Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board, St. James Catholic Global Learning Centre Department of Biosciences University of Calgary AB Ecological Processes Branch U.S. Army ERDC-CERL Department of Biology, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH, USA Escuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores Unidad Morelia UNAM Institute of Evolution and Ecology University of Tübingen Tübingen Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse Urban Wildlife Institute Department of Conservation and Science, Lincoln Park Zoo Departamento de Ecología Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción Department of Biological Sciences University of Denver CO Department of Biological Sciences Mississippi State University MS Department of Biology Center for Computational & Integrative Biology Rutgers University-Camden Kunming Institute of Botany Chinese Academy of Sciences Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry Laurentian University ON Ministry of Education Key Laboratory for Biodiversity Science and Ecological Engineering College of Life Sciences Beijing Normal University School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia Posgrado en Ciencias Biológicas Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Department of Biological Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA Department of Biology University of New Mexico NM Department of Biology University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire Agriculture Institute Iranian Research Organization for Science and Technology (IROST) Department of Biology Colby College ME Instituto de Biología Universidad de Antioquia Department of Biology University of Massachusetts Boston MA Agricultural Biology Colorado State University CO Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología Facultad de Biología Universidad de Sevilla, Av. Reina Mercedes s/n Facultad de Estudios Interdisciplinarios Centro GEMA- Genómica Universidad Mayor Evolutionary Ecology Group Naturalis Biodiversity Center Department of Biology and Chemistry Nipissing University ON, North Bay Center for Ecological Research Kyoto University Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research Program University of Alaska Fairbanks Department of Botany and Molecular Evolution Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt Departamento de Biodiversidade Instituto de Biociências Univ Estadual Paulista - UNESP Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies University of Wisconsin-Madison WI Department of Biology, California State University, Northridge, Los Angeles, CA, USA Department of Ecology Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Facultad de Ciencias y Biotecnologia Universidad CES Department of Biology Hofstra University Faculty of Biosciences and Aquaculture Nord University, Bodø Division of Biological Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA Department of Biology University of Richmond VA Estación de Biodiversidad Tiputini Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales Universidad San Francisco de Quito USFQ Department of Biological Sciences Institute of Environment Florida International University FL Agronomy Department University of Almería Department of Biological Sciences and Center for Urban Ecology and Sustainability Butler University IN Department of Biological Sciences Louisiana State University LA Faculty of Biological Sciences, Goethe University Frankfurt Institute of Biology Leiden Leiden University Department of Biological and Environmental Science University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Department of Biology University of Louisville KY Organization for Programs on Environmental Science University of Tokyo CNRS AgroParisTech Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay Department of Biology, Providence College, Providence, RI, USA General Zoology Institute for Biology Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg International Arctic Research Center University of Alaska Fairbanks Science, Technology and Society Department, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA SLU Swedish Species Information Centre Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Department of Biology Westfield State University MA Centre of New Technologies University of Warsaw Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA Plant Biology Department Michigan State University MI Biology Department Davidson College College of Horticulture and Forestry Sciences/ Hubei Engineering Technology Research Center for Forestry Information Huazhong Agricultural University School of Life Sciences Technical University of Munich School of Life Sciences Lanzhou University Institute of Ecology and Evolution University of Bern Department of Evolution Ecology and Behaviour University of Liverpool Departamento de Biodiversidade Instituto de Biociências Univ Estadual Paulista - UNESP

How do researchers choose their study species? Some choices are based on ecological or economic importance, some on ease of study, some on tradition—but could the name of a species influence researcher decisions? We asked whether phytophagous arthropod species named after their host plants were more likely to be assayed for host-associated genetic differentiation (or ‘HAD’; the evolution of cryptic, genetically isolated host specialists within an apparently more generalist lineage). We chose 30 arthropod species (from a Google Scholar search) for which a HAD hypothesis has been tested. We traced the etymologies of species names in the 30 corresponding genera, and asked whether HAD tests were more frequent among species whose etymologies were based on host-plant names (e.g. Eurosta solidaginis , which attacks Solidago ) versus those with other etymologies (e.g. Eurosta fenestrata , from Latin fenestra , ‘window’). Species with host-derived etymologies were more likely to feature in studies of HAD than those with other etymologies. We speculate that the etymology of a scientific name can draw a researcher's attention to aspects of life-history and thus influence the direction of our scientific gaze.

How do researchers choose their study species? Some choices are based on ecological or economic importance, some on ease of study, some on tradition – but could the name of a species influence researcher decisions? We asked whether phytophagous arthropod species named after their host plants were more likely to be assayed for host-associated genetic differentiation (or ‘HAD’; the evolution of cryptic, genetically isolated host specialists within an apparently more generalist lineage). We chose 30 arthropod species (from a Google Scholar search) for which a HAD hypothesis has been tested. We traced the etymologies of species names in the 30 corresponding genera, and asked whether HAD tests were more frequent among species whose etymologies were based on host-plant names (e.g., Eurosta solidaginis) vs. those with other etymologies (e.g., Eurosta cribata). Species with host-derived etymologies were more likely to feature in studies of HAD than those with other etymologies. We speculate that the etymology of a scientific name can draw a researcher’s attention to aspects of life-history and thus influence the direction of our scientific gaze.

Floral scent is considered an important long-distance signal that attracts pollinators, but also has been suggested to function at shorter distances such as within-flower nectar guides or as a defense against antagonists. Indeed, in some species floral scent production and emission show spatial patterns of variation within flowers, as certain compounds are exclusively emitted from specific floral tissues. In other species, the different volatile organic compounds that constitute the floral bouquet are emitted evenly from the entire flower. Here, we summarize the current evidence on floral scent variation within flowers by combining a literature review of published data on tissue-level floral scent variation (41 species) with floral scent dissections (17 species). For each species, we recorded the total number of volatile compounds separately and grouped in major chemical classes. To facilitate comparisons across diverse species, we compared volatiles emitted by 1) the whole flower, 2) the visual floral tissues (i.e. petals and colored structures), 3) non-visual floral tissues (i.e. green parts and reproductive structures), as well as 4) the compounds emitted by both visual and non-visual tissues. Results show that floral scent variation is frequent, but by no means ubiquitous, occurring in species from distantly related groups. We discuss the two main functional hypotheses promoting floral scent variation within flowers, i.e. as a pollinator attractant at short-distances or a defensive function against antagonists, together with non-functional hypotheses (e.g. pleiotropic effects, ecological costs). We point out further directions on this topic and suggest experimental approaches testing the attractiveness of compounds emitted by different floral parts alone and in combination with other floral signals. Our synthesis provides a foundation for future studies on the functional ecology of floral scent and reinforces the idea of high complexity in floral chemical signals. (Less)

Tripartite interactions between plants, herbivores, and pollinators hold fitness consequences for most angiosperms. However, little is known on how plants evolve in response—and in particular what the net selective outcomes are for traits of shared relevance to pollinators and herbivores. In this study, we manipulated herbivory (“presence” and “absence” treatments) and pollination (“open” and “hand pollination” treatments) in a full factorial common-garden experiment with woodland strawberry (Fragaria vesca L.). This design allowed us to quantify the relative importance and interactive effects of herbivore- and pollinator-mediated selection on nine traits related to plant defence and attraction. Our results showed that pollinators imposed stronger selection than herbivores on traits related to both direct and indirect (i.e., tritrophic) defence. However, conflicting selection was imposed on inflorescence density: a trait that appears to be shared by herbivores and pollinators as a host plant signal. However, in all cases, selection imposed by one agent depended largely on the presence or ecological effect of the other, suggesting that dynamic patterns of selection could be a common outcome of these interactions in natural populations. As a whole, our findings highlight the significance of plant-herbivore-pollinator interactions as potential drivers of evolutionary change, and reveal that pollinators likely play an underappreciated role as selective agents on direct and in direct plant defence.

[Aim] Intraspecific trait variation (ITV) within natural plant communities can be large, influencing local ecological processes and dynamics. Here, we shed light on how ITV in vegetative and floral traits responds to large‐scale abiotic and biotic gradients (i.e., climate and species richness). Specifically, we tested whether associations of ITV with temperature, precipitation and species richness were consistent with any of four hypotheses relating to stress tolerance and competition. Furthermore, we estimated the degree of correlation between ITV in vegetative and floral traits and how they vary along the gradients., [Location] Global., [Time period] 1975–2016., [Major taxa studied] Herbaceous and woody plants., [Methods] We compiled a dataset of 18,401 measurements of the absolute extent of ITV (measured as the coefficient of variation) in nine vegetative and seven floral traits from 2,822 herbaceous and woody species at 2,372 locations., [Results] Large‐scale associations between ITV and climate were trait specific and more prominent for vegetative traits, especially leaf morphology, than for floral traits. The ITV showed pronounced associations with climate, with lower ITV values in colder areas and higher values in drier areas. The associations of ITV with species richness were inconsistent across traits. Species‐specific associations across gradients were often idiosyncratic, and covariation in ITV was weaker between vegetative and floral traits than within the two trait groups. [Main conclusions] Our results show that, depending on the traits considered, ITV either increased or decreased with climate stress and species richness, suggesting that both factors can constrain or enhance ITV, which might foster plant‐population persistence in stressful conditions. Given the species‐specific responses and covariation in ITV, associations can be hard to predict for traits and species not yet studied. We conclude that consideration of ITV can improve our understanding of how plants cope with stressful conditions and environmental change across spatial and biological scales., Open Access funding was provided by Ulm University under the DEAL‐agreement.

BACKGROUND: Floral nectar is an important determinant of plant–pollinator interactions and an integral component of pollination syndromes, suggesting it is under pollinator-mediated selection. However, compared to floral display traits, we know little about the evolutionary ecology of nectar. Combining a literature review with a meta-analysis approach, we summarize the evidence for heritable variation in nectar traits and link this variation to pollinator response and plant fitness. We further review associations between nectar traits and floral signals and discuss them in the context of honest signalling and targets of selection. SCOPE: Although nectar is strongly influenced by environmental factors, heritable variation in nectar production rate has been documented in several populations (mean h(2) = 0.31). Almost nothing is known about heritability of other nectar traits, such as sugar and amino acid concentrations. Only a handful of studies have quantified selection on nectar traits, and few find statistically significant selection. Pollinator responses to nectar traits indicate they may drive selection, but studies tying pollinator preferences to plant fitness are lacking. So far, only one study conclusively identified pollinators as selective agents on a nectar trait, and the role of microbes, herbivores, nectar robbers and abiotic factors in nectar evolution is largely hypothetical. Finally, there is a trend for positive correlations among floral cues and nectar traits, indicating honest signalling of rewards. CONCLUSIONS: Important progress can be made by studies that quantify current selection on nectar in natural populations, as well as experimental approaches that identify the target traits and selective agents involved. Signal–reward associations suggest that correlational selection may shape evolution of nectar traits, and studies exploring these more complex forms of natural selection are needed. Many questions about nectar evolution remain unanswered, making this a field ripe for future research.

Bacteria on floral tissue can have negative effects by consuming resources and affecting nectar quality, which subsequently could reduce pollinator visitation and plant fitness. Plants however can employ chemical defences to reduce bacteria density. In North American, bee-pollinated Penstemon digitalis, the nectar volatile S-(+)-linalool can influence plant fitness, and terpenes such as linalool are known for their antimicrobial properties suggesting that it may also play a role in plant–microbe interactions. Therefore, we hypothesized linalool could affect bacterial growth on P. digitalis plants/flowers. Because P. digitalis emits linalool from nectar and nectary tissue but not petals, we hypothesised that the effects of linalool could depend on tissue of origin due to varying exposure. We isolated bacteria from nectary tissue, petals and leaves, and compared their growth relative to control using two volatile concentrations representing the natural emission range of linalool. To assess whether effects were specific to linalool, we compared results with the co-occurring nectar volatile, methyl nicotinate. We show that response to floral volatiles can be substance and tissue-origin specific. Because linalool could slow growth rate of bacteria across the P. digitalis phyllosphere, floral emission of linalool could play a role in mediating plant–bacteria interactions in this system. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00049-018-0252-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Chemical communication is ubiquitous. The identification of conserved structural elements in visual and acoustic communication is well established, but comparable information on chemical communication displays (CCDs) is lacking. We assessed the phenotypic integration of CCDs in a meta‐analysis to characterize patterns of covariation in CCDs and identified functional or biosynthetically constrained modules. Poorly integrated plant CCDs (i.e. low covariation between scent compounds) support the notion that plants often utilize one or few key compounds to repel antagonists or to attract pollinators and enemies of herbivores. Animal CCDs (mostly insect pheromones) were usually more integrated than those of plants (i.e. stronger covariation), suggesting that animals communicate via fixed proportions among compounds. Both plant and animal CCDs were composed of modules, which are groups of strongly covarying compounds. Biosynthetic similarity of compounds revealed biosynthetic constraints in the covariation patterns of plant CCDs. We provide a novel perspective on chemical communication and a basis for future investigations on structural properties of CCDs. This will facilitate identifying modules and biosynthetic constraints that may affect the outcome of selection and thus provide a predictive framework for evolutionary trajectories of CCDs in plants and animals., The project was supported by the Graduate School ‘Evolutionary Networks: Organisms, Reactions, Molecules’ (E‐Norm) of the Heinrich‐Heine‐University, Düsseldorf, Germany, the Max Planck Society and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG JU 2856/1‐1 and DFG JU 2856/2‐2).

Plants emit a diverse array of volatile organic compounds that can function as cues to other plants. Plants can use volatiles emitted by neighbors to gain information about their environment, and respond by adjusting their phenotype. Less is known about whether the many different volatile signals that plants emit are all equally likely to function as cues to other plants. We review evidence for the function of floral volatile signals and conclude that plants are as likely to perceive and respond to floral volatiles as to other, better-studied volatiles. We propose that eavesdropping on floral volatile cues is particularly likely to be adaptive because plants can respond to these cues by adjusting traits that directly affect pollination and mating.

Variability in floral volatile emissions can occur temporally through floral development, during diel cycles, as well as spatially within a flower. These spatiotemporal patterns are hypothesized to provide additional information to floral visitors, but they are rarely measured, and their attendant hypotheses are even more rarely tested. In Penstemon digitalis, a plant whose floral scent has been shown to be under strong phenotypic selection for seed fitness, we investigated spatiotemporal variation in floral scent by using dynamic headspace collection, respectively solid-phase microextraction, and analyzed the volatile samples by combined gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Total volatile emission was greatest during flowering and peak pollinator activity hours, suggesting its importance in mediating ecological interactions. We also detected tissue and reward-specific compounds, consistent with the hypothesis that complexity in floral scent composition reflects several ecological functions. In particular, we found tissue-specific scents for the stigma, stamens, and staminode (a modified sterile stamen common to all Penstemons). Our findings emphasize the dynamic nature of floral scents and highlight a need for greater understanding of ecological and physiological mechanisms driving spatiotemporal patterns in scent production.

The popularity of science blogging has increased in recent years, but the number of academic scientists who maintain regular blogs is limited. The role and impact of science communication blogs aimed at general audiences is often discussed, but the value of science community blogs aimed at the academic community has largely been overlooked. Here, we focus on our own experiences as bloggers to argue that science community blogs are valuable to the academic community. We use data from our own blogs ( n = 7) to illustrate some of the factors influencing reach and impact of science community blogs. We then discuss the value of blogs as a standalone medium, where rapid communication of scholarly ideas, opinions and short observational notes can enhance scientific discourse, and discussion of personal experiences can provide indirect mentorship for junior researchers and scientists from underrepresented groups. Finally, we argue that science community blogs can be treated as a primary source and provide some key points to consider when citing blogs in peer-reviewed literature.

Plant diversity can affect ecological processes such as competition and herbivory, and these ecological processes can act as drivers of evolutionary change. However, surprisingly little is known about how ecological variation in plant diversity can alter selective regimes on members of the community. Here, we examine how plant diversity at two different scales (genotypic and species diversity) impacts natural selection on a focal plant species, the common evening primrose (Oenothera biennis). Because competition is frequently relaxed in both genotypically and species rich plant communities, we hypothesized that increasing diversity would weaken selection on competitive ability. Changes in plant diversity can also affect associated arthropod communities. Therefore, we hypothesized that diversity would alter selection on plant traits mediating these interactions, such as herbivory related traits. We grew 24 focal O. biennis genotypes within four different neighbourhoods: genotypic monocultures or polycultures of O. biennis, and species monocultures or polycultures of old-field species that commonly co-occur with O. biennis. We then measured genotypic selection on nine plant traits known to be ecologically important for competition and herbivory. Focal O. biennis plants were smaller, flowered for shorter periods of time, had lower fitness, and experienced greater attack from specialist predispersal seed predators when grown with conspecifics versus heterospecifics. While neither conspecific nor heterospecific diversity altered trait means, both types of diversity altered the strength of selection on focal O. biennis plants. Specifically, selection on plant biomass was stronger in conspecific monocultures versus polycultures, but weaker in heterospecific monocultures versus polycultures. We found no evidence of selection on plant traits that mediate insect interactions, despite differences in arthropod communities on plants surrounded by conspecifics versus heterospecifics. Our data demonstrate that plant genotypic and species diversity can act as agents of natural selection, potentially driving evolutionary changes in plant communities.

Fragrance is a putatively important character in the evolution of flowering plants, but natural selection on scent is rarely studied and thus poorly understood. We characterized floral scent composition and emission in a common garden of Penstemon digitalis from three nearby source populations. We measured phenotypic selection on scent as well as floral traits more frequently examined, such as floral phenology, display size, corolla pigment, and inflorescence height. Scent differed among populations in a common garden, underscoring the potential for scent to be shaped by differential selection pressures. Phenotypic selection on flower number and display size was strong. However, selection favoured scent rather than flower size or colour, suggesting that smelling stronger benefits reproductive success in P. digitalis. Linalool was a direct target of selection and its high frequency in floral-scent bouquets suggests that further studies of both pollinator- and antagonist-mediated selection on this compound would further our understanding of scent evolution. Our results indicate that chemical dimensions of floral display are just as likely as other components to experience selective pressure in a nonspecialized flowering herb. Therefore, studies that integrate visual and chemical floral traits should better reflect the true nature of floral evolutionary ecology.

• A major gap in our understanding of floral evolution, especially micro-evolutionary processes, is the role of pollinators in generating patterns of natural selection on floral traits. Here we explicitly tested the role of pollinators in selecting floral traits in a herbaceous perennial, Penstemon digitalis. • We manipulated the effect of pollinators on fitness through hand pollinations and compared phenotypic selection in open- and hand-pollinated plants. • Despite the lack of pollen limitation in our population, pollinators mediated selection on floral size and floral display. Hand pollinations removed directional selection for larger flowers and stabilizing selection on flower number, suggesting that pollinators were the agents of selection on both of these traits. • We reviewed studies that measured natural selection on floral traits by biotic agents and generally found stronger signatures of selection imposed by pollinators than by herbivores and co-flowering plant species.

Herbivores that oviposit in flowers of animal-pollinated plants depend on pollinators for seed production and are therefore expected to choose flowers that attract pollinators. This provides a mechanism by which seed herbivores and pollinators could impose conflicting selection on floral traits. We measured phenotypic selection on floral traits of Lobelia siphilitica (Lobeliaceae) via female fitness to determine the relative strength of selection by pollinators and a specialist predispersal seed herbivore. We were able to attribute selection on flowering phenology to the herbivores. However, no selection could be attributed to pollinators, resulting in no conflicting selection on floral traits. Unlike pollinators, whose preference for certain floral traits does not always translate into higher fitness, any discrimination by seed herbivores is likely to decrease fitness of the preferred floral phenotype. Thus predispersal seed herbivores may be a significant agent of selection on floral traits.

Assumed trade-offs between male and female functions in hermaphroditic flowers have been difficult to demonstrate. Collinsia parviflora (Scrophulariaceae) is a winter annual that exhibits significant among-population variation in corolla size in British Columbia, Canada. We asked whether reduction in secondary male allocation (i.e., the attractive corolla), a preliminary indicator of mating system, was matched by a reduction in primary male allocation (i.e., pollen production), and whether there were allocation trade-offs between male and female function both within and among six study populations. Larger-flowered populations allocated more to male function (androecium and corolla biomass), and because populations did not vary in female biomass allocation (gynoecium and calyx), population differences were not due to simple allometric scaling. Populations also differed in per-flower gamete production (pollen and ovules). We found male-female trade-offs within populations between androecium and gynoecium mass and between corolla and calyx mass. Among populations, there was a marginal trade-off between pollen and ovule production and a significant within-male trade-off between pollen grain size and number. Trade-offs between the sexes were primarily apparent when we controlled for flower size in the analysis. Variation among populations in sex allocation may reflect different optima related to the mating system.

The seasonal variation of pollen collected from different plant species by greenhouse bumblebees was investigated to determine how frequently bumblebees forage outside of commercial tomato greenhouses. Pollen was collected from bumblebees at three greenhouses between February and September 2001 and the plant species identity of pollen collected was determined with light microscopy. A significant amount of non-tomato pollen was collected by bumblebees during one or more months from outside each of the three greenhouses studied. The bees brought back as little as an average of 5% non-tomato pollen between February and September at one greenhouse and as much as 73% during July at another. Therefore, greenhouse tomato growers are probably not obtaining maximum pollination benefit from bumblebee colonies and should address methods to reduce their foraging outside the greenhouse. Key words: Bumblebee, Bombus occidentalis, Bombus impatiens, pollen, greenhouse, tomato

Floral chemistry mediates plant–pollinator interactions through floral scents and reward components. Although improved techniques have increased interest in studying floral volatiles and nectar chemistry, these two foci have generally been studied in isolation. The ecological functions of floral chemistry have been relatively well studied and focused on pollinator behaviour. While studies comparing chemistry between plant parts and across phylogenies are increasing, work on the evolution of floral chemistry and the importance of community context in mediating pollinator responses is lacking. Future research should concentrate on more holistic studies that include both signal and reward chemistry to understand the relative contribution of these complex and dynamic floral traits to the ecology and evolution of plants and their pollinators.

Measuring the agents of natural selection is important because it allows us to understand not only which traits are expected to evolve but also why they will evolve. Natural selection by pollinators on floral traits is often assumed because in outcrossing animal-pollinated plants flowers are generally thought to function as advertisements of rewards directed at pollinators. We tested the role of bee pollinators in selection on Penstemon digitalis and found that pollinators were driving selection for larger and more flowers. However, what makes our publication unique is the additional information we gained from reviewing the few other studies that also directly tested whether pollinators were agents of selection on floral traits. As we would expect if pollinators are important agents of selection, selection on floral traits was significantly stronger when pollinators were present than when their choices were experimentally removed. Taken together, these results suggest that pollinators can be important drivers of selection in contemporary populations.

Adaptation through natural selection is the basis for evolutionary change. At the micro-evolutionary scale, population differentiation is the path from which species eventually form. For this reason, researchers have a long history of studying local adaptation within species. Tests of local adaptation usually involve reciprocal transplants of individuals between populations and com-paring some kind of performance/fitness measure of the individuals. In general, local adaptation is defined as when local individuals do better in their local habitat than individuals transplanted from other environments ('local vs. foreign', Kawecki and Ebert 2004). Alternat-ively, local adaptation can also be defined as individuals having higher fitness at their home site compared with other sites ('home vs. away', Kawecki and Ebert 2004). Of course, not all comparisons of reciprocal transplants meet these criteria, and Kawecki and Ebert (2004) suggest that the ‘local vs. foreign’ criteria should be used as a diagnostic for local adaptation, especially when the ‘home vs. away’ criterion is met, but not the ‘local vs. foreign.’ In these cases, further studies could reveal why some genotypes do better than the local ones. Of course, local adaptation is not predicted to be or found in all cases (Leimu and Fischer 2008, Hereford 2009). However, Vesakoski and Jormalainen (2013) suggest we might be ignoring a signal of local adapta-tion from reciprocal transplant studies. Similar to the ‘home vs. away’ criterion, their ‘allopatric site advantage’ hypothesis (naming is mine) suggests some genotypes are superior in all conditions. However, it differs from the ‘home vs. away’ criterion because the ‘home’ site is not necessarily the best for all populations. Vesakoski and Jormalainen suggest that individuals may locally adapt to the level of stress to which they are exposed. If the ‘allopatric site advantage’ operates in populations, than Vesakoski and Jormalainen lay out a particular pattern that one would expect from reciprocal transplant studies. Here, a ‘low’ stress population should do better in its home site than away sites, meeting the ‘home vs. away’ criterion. In a ‘high’ stress population, individuals from the high stress environment should do better than individuals from the low stress environment, meeting the ‘local vs. foreign’ criterion. However, at the low stress site, individuals from the high stress environment should do equally well or better than the low stress individuals, meeting none of the local adaptation criteria. The ‘allopatric site advantage’ hypothesis shares similarities with the idea that the opportunity for selection is related to the interaction strength (e.g. Vanhoenacker et al. 2013). In general, the opportunity for selection on traits is expected to increase with the interaction strength (although perhaps not linearly). Similarly, if a population is tolerant of the local stress, than one would not expect further selection for having even higher tolerance to that stress. Presumably a population would need to be exposed to increased levels of the stressor to have further selection to increase tolerance. Thus, in the hypothetical example given by Vesakoski and Jormalainen (2013), herbivores adapt to tolerate the local level of a plant resistance chemical. Once a population of herbivores has adapted to the local defense levels, the interaction strength is diminished (for the herbivore) and there is little/no opportunity for selection on the traits associated with tolerance. Of course, for illustrative purposes, this example simplifies plant-herbivore interactions to a moment in time and

Natural selection is thought to have shaped the evolution of floral scent; however, unlike other floral characters, we have a rudimentary knowledge of how phenotypic selection acts on scent. We found that floral scent was under stronger selection than corolla traits such as flower size and flower color in weakly scented Penstemon digitalis. Our results suggest that to understand evolution in floral phenotypes, including scent in floral selection, studies are crucial. For P. digitalis, linalool was the direct target of selection in the scent bouquet. Therefore, we determined the enantiomeric configuration of linalool because interacting insects may perceive the enantiomers differentially. We found that P. digitalis produces only (S)-(+)-linalool and, more interestingly, it is also taken up into the nectar. Because the nectar is scented and flavored with (S)-(+)-linalool, it may be an important cue for pollinators visiting P. digitalis flowers.

Flowering phenology is an important determinant of a plant's reproductive success. Both assortative mating and niche construction can result in the evolution of correlations between phenology and other reproductive, functional, and life history traits. Correlations between phenology and herbivore defence traits are particularly likely because the timing of flowering can allow a plant to escape herbivory. To test whether herbivore escape and defence are correlated, we estimated phenotypic and genetic correlations between flowering phenology and latex production in greenhouse-grown Lobelia siphilitica L. (Lobeliaceae). Lobelia siphilitica plants that flower later escape herbivory by a specialist pre-dispersal seed predator, and thus should invest fewer resources in defence. Consistent with this prediction, we found that later flowering was phenotypically and genetically correlated with reduced latex production. To test whether herbivore escape and latex production were costly, we also measured four fitness correlates. Flowering phenology was negatively genetically correlated with three out of four fitness estimates, suggesting that herbivore escape can be costly. In contrast, we did not find evidence for costs of latex production. Generally, our results suggest that herbivore escape and defence traits will not evolve independently in L. siphilitica.

Biodiversity loss is proceeding at an unprecedented rate, yet we lack a thorough understanding of the consequences of losing diversity at different scales. While species diversity is known to impact community and ecosystem processes, genotypic diversity is assumed to have relatively smaller effects. Nonetheless, a few recent studies suggest that genotypic diversity may have quantitatively similar ecological consequences compared to species diversity. Here we show that increasing either genotypic diversity of common evening primrose (Oenothera biennis) or species diversity of old-field plant species resulted in nearly equivalent increases (approximately 17%) in aboveground primary production. The predominant mechanism explaining this effect, niche complementarity, was similar for each type of diversity. Arthropod species richness also increased with both types of plant diversity, but the mechanisms leading to this effect differed: abundance-driven accumulation of arthropod species was important in plant genotypic polycultures, whereas resource specialization was important in plant species polycultures. Thus, similar increases in primary productivity differentially impacted higher trophic levels in response to each type of plant diversity. These results highlight important ecological similarities and differences between genotypic and species diversity and suggest that genotypic diversity may play a larger role in community and ecosystem processes than previously realized.

 Premise of the study: Early reproductive maturity is common in dry and ephemeral habitats and often associated with smaller fl owers with increased potential for within-fl ower (autonomous) self-pollination. We investigated whether populations from locations that differ in moisture availability, known to vary for whole-plant development rate, also varied in the timing of autonomous selfi ng. This timing is of interest because the modes of selfi ng (prior, competing, and delayed) have different fi tness consequences.  Methods: We measured timing of anther dehiscence, stigma receptivity, and herkogamy under pollinator-free conditions for plants from three populations of Collinsia parvifl ora that differed in annual precipitation, fl ower size, and time to sexual maturity. Using a manipulative experiment, we determined potential seed production via prior, competing, and delayed autonomous selfi ng for each population.  Key results: Stigma receptivity, anther dehiscence, and selfi ng ability covaried with whole-plant development and climate. Plants from the driest site, which reached sexual maturity earliest, had receptive stigmas and dehiscent anthers in bud. Most seeds were produced via prior selfi ng. The population from the wettest site with slowest development was not receptive until after fl owers opened. Although competing selfi ng was possible, all selfi ng was delayed. The intermediate population was between these extremes, with signifi cant contributions from both competing and delayed selfi ng.  Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that within-species variation in the timing of selfi ng occurs and is related to both environmental conditions and whole-plant development rates. We suggest that, if these results can be generalized to other species, mating systems may evolve in response to ongoing climatic change.

Natural selection is a key process of population to species divergence and diversification. Since Lande and Arnold’s 1983 seminal paper “The measurement of selection on correlated characters”, hundreds of evolutionary biologists have measured phenotypic selection in wild populations (Kingsolver et al. 2012). These microevolutionary studies aim to understand the process of adaptive evolution, by regressing variation in putatively adaptive traits against measurements of fitness. The LandeArnold approach can compare selection strength, direction, and shape for different traits, making it a powerful tool for studying contemporary evolution. Although well over 50 studies have measured selection on floral characters, until recently none have incorporated chemical features of floral phenotypes, such as scent. Differing traditions may in part explain the scarcity of selection studies on floral scent; while evolutionary ecologists have focused on visual and mechanical aspects of floral display, floral scents have been more commonly studied in functional and ecological contexts. However, integration of floral characters into a unified perspective is critical to understand both function and evolution of floral diversity.

The Garry Oak Ecosystem (GOE) is a fragmented and endangered ecosystem in Canada, and is currently the focus of conservation and restoration efforts in British Columbia. However, little is known about the basic biology of GOE forbs, or their relationships with pollinating insects. We monitored wildflowers and their insect visitors in 25 quadrats within a 25 × 25 metre plot, located in a fragment of the GOE near Duncan, British Columbia, for six weeks (the majority of the flowering period). Overall, 21 native and non-native forb species flowered in our quadrats during the survey, and we observed an additional six forb species flowering outside of our quadrats. Eight forbs were visited within quadrats by a total of 13 insect taxa, identified to morphospecies. Visits by eight additional morphospecies were observed outside of the quadrats. In general, visitation was low; however, most insect morphospecies were observed visiting more than one plant species, and most plant species were visited by more than one insect morphospecies, suggesting that pollination may be generalised in this community. A Chi-squared analysis indicated that insect visitation was not proportional to the relative abundance of forbs, with higher than expected visitation to Common camas (Camassia quamash), and no observed visits to 11 species, most with very small (putatively unattractive) flowers. The most frequent insect visitor was the introduced Honeybee, Apis mellifera, followed by native mason bees (Osmia spp.) and mining bees (Andrena spp.). Our observations provide baseline data for future, detailed studies that should investigate the importance of plant-pollinator mutualisms for sustainability of populations and communities in this rare ecosystem.