SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Biernaskie, J.M., Cartar, R.V. & Hurly, T.A. (2002) Risk-averse inflorescence departure in hummingbirds and bumble bees: could plants benefit from variable nectar volumes? Oikos 98, 98104.
  • Gross, M.R. (1996) Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within the sexes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11, 9298.
  • Harder, L.D. (1990) Behavioural responses by bumble bees to variation in pollen availability. Oecologia 85, 4147.
  • Harder, L.D. & Barrett, S.C.H. (1995) Mating cost of large floral displays in hermaphroditic plants. Nature 373, 512515.
  • Harder, L.D. & Thomson, J.D. (1989) Evolutionary options for maximizing pollen dispersal in animal-pollinated plants. American Naturalist 133, 323344.
  • Harder, L.D., Williams, N.M., Jordan, C.Y. & Nelson, W.A. (2001) The effects of floral design and display on pollinator economics and pollen dispersal. Cognitive Ecology of Pollination (eds L.Chittka & J.D.Thomson), pp. 297317. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  • Iwasa, Y., De Jong, T.J. & Klinkhamer, P.G.L. (1995) Why pollinators visit only a fraction of the open flowers on a plant: the plant's point of view. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 8, 439453.
  • De Jong, T.J., Waser, N.M. & Klinkhamer, P.G.L. (1993) Geitonogamy: the neglected side of selfing. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8, 321325.
  • Klinkhamer, P.G.L. & De Jong, T.J. (1993) Attractiveness to pollinators: a plant's dilemma. Oikos 66, 180184.
  • Klinkhamer, P.G.L., De Jong, T.J. & Metz, A.J. (1994) Why plants can be too attractive – a discussion of measures to estimate male fitness. Journal of Ecology 82, 191194.
  • Lewontin, R.C. (1966) On the measurement of relative variability. Systematic Zoology 25, 141142.
  • Moss, E.H. (1983) Flora of Alberta, 2nd edn. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
  • Ohashi, K. & Yahara, T. (2001) Behavioral responses of pollinators to variation in floral display size and their influences on the evolution of floral traits. Cognitive Ecology of Pollination (eds L.Chittka & J.D.Thomson), pp. 274296. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  • Pyke, G.H. (1978) Optimal foraging in bumblebees and coevolution with their plants. Oecologia 36, 281293.
  • Rademaker, M.C.J., De Jong, T.J. & Klinkhamer, P.G.L. (1997) Pollen dynamics of bumble-bee visitation on Echium vulgare. Functional Ecology 11, 554563.
  • Rathcke, B.J. (1992) Nectar distributions, pollinator behavior, and plant reproductive success. Effects of Resource Distribution on Animal–Plant Interactions (eds M. D.Hunter, T.Ohgushi & P.W.Price), pp. 114138. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
  • Real, L. & Rathcke, B.J. (1988) Patterns of individual variability in floral resources. Ecology 69, 728735.
  • Sakai, S. (1993) A model for nectar secretion in animal-pollinated plants. Evolutionary Ecology 7, 394400.
  • Shafir, S. (2000) Risk-sensitive foraging: the effect of relative variability. Oikos 88, 663669.
  • Stephens, D.W. (1981) The logic of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Animal Behaviour 29, 628629.
  • Waser, N.M. (1983) The adaptive nature of floral traits: ideas and evidence. Pollination Biology (ed. L.A.Real), pp. 242286. Academic Press, Orlando, FL.