SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Aizen M. A. (2001) Flower sex ratio, pollinator abundance, and the seasonal pollination dynamics of a protandrous plant. Ecology 82: 127144.
  • Andersson S. (1988) Size-dependent pollination efficiency in Anchusa officinalis. Oecologia 76: 125130.
  • Augspurger C. K. (1980) Mass-flowering of a tropical shrub (Hybanthus prunifolius): influence on pollinator attraction and movement. Evolution 34: 475488.
  • Baker H. G. (1983) An outline of the history of anthecology, or pollination biology. In: Real L. A. (ed.). Pollination Biology. Academic, Orlando, pp. 728.
  • Barrett S. C. H., Harder L. D. & Cole W. W. (1994) Effects of flower number and position on self-fertilization in experimental populations of Eichhornia paniculata (Pontederiaceae). Functional Ecology 8: 526535.
  • Bertin R. I. & Newman C. M. (1993) Dichogamy in angiosperms. Botanical Review 59: 112152.
  • Bhardwaj M. & Eckert C. G. (2001) Functional analysis of synchronous dichogamy in flowering rush, Butomus umbellatus (Butomaceae). American Journal of Botany 88: 22042213.
  • 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.
  • Brody A. K. & Mitchell R. J. (1997) Effects of experimental manipulation of inflorescence size on pollination and pre-dispersal seed predation in the hummingbird-pollinated plant Ipomopsis aggregata. Oecologia 110: 8693.
  • Brunet J. & Charlesworth D. (1995) Floral sex allocation in sequentially blooming plants. Evolution 49: 7079.
  • Brunet J. & Eckert C. G. (1998) Effects of floral morphology and display on outcrossing in Blue Columbine, Aquilegia caerulea (Ranunculaceae). Functional Ecology 12: 596606.
  • Burtt B. L. (1965) Compositae and the study of functional evolution. Transactions and Proceedings of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh 39: 216232.
  • Charlesworth D. & Charlesworth B. (1987) Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18: 237268.
  • Corbet S. A., Cuthill I., Fallows M., Harrison T. & Hartley G. (1981) Why do nectar-foraging bees and wasps work upwards on inflorescences? Oecologia 51: 7983.
  • Crawford T. J. (1984) What is a population? In: Shorrocks B. (ed.). Evolutionary Ecology. Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 135173.
  • Cresswell J. E. (1990) How and why do nectar-foraging bumblebees initiate movements between inflorescences of wild Monarda fistulosa (Lamiaceae)? Oecologia 82: 450460.
  • Dafni A., Lehrer M. & Kevan P. G. (1997) Spatial flower parameters and insect spatial vision. Biology Review 72: 239292.
  • Diggle P. K. (1995) Architectural effects and the interpretation of patterns of fruit and seed development. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 26: 531552.
  • Dilcher D. (2000) Toward a new synthesis: major evolutionary trends in the angiosperm fossil flower. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 97: 70307036.
  • Dreisig H. (1989) Nectar distribution assessment by bumblebees foraging at vertical inflorescences. Oikos 55: 239249.
  • Eckert C. G. (2000) Contributions of autogamy and geitonogamy to self-fertilization in a mass-flowering, clonal plant. Ecology 81: 532542.
  • Fishbein M. & Venable D. L. (1996) Evolution of inflorescence design: theory and data. Evolution 50: 21652177.
  • Frankie G. W., Haber W. A., Opler P. A. & Bawa K. S. (1983) Characteristics and organization of the large bee pollination system in the Costa Rican dry forest. In: Jones C. E. & Little R. L. (eds). Handbook of Experimental Pollination Biology. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 411447.
  • Galloway L. F., Cirigliano T. & Gremski K. (2002) The contribution of display size and dichogamy to potential geitonogamy in Campanula americana. International Journal of Plant Science 163: 133139.
  • Geber M. A. (1985) The relationship of plant size to self-pollination in Mertensia ciliata. Ecology 66: 762772.
  • Giurfa M. & Lehrer M. (2001) Honeybee vision and floral displays: from detection to close-up recognition. In: Chittka L. & Thomson J. D. (eds). Cognitive Ecology of Pollination. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 6182.
  • Giurfa M. & Núñez J. A. (1993) Efficient floret inspection by honey bees in capitula of Carduus acanthoides. Ecological Entomology 18: 116122.
  • Goulson D. G., Stout J. C., Hawson S. A. & Allen J. A. (1998) Floral display size in comfrey, Symphytum officinale L. (Boraginaceae): relationships with visitation by three bumblebee species. Oecologia 113: 502508.
  • Grant K. A. & Grant V. (1968) Hummingbirds and Their Flowers. Columbia University Press, New York.
  • Gross W. E. (2003) Dependence of hummingbird movement within inflorescences on the spatial arrangement of flowers. MSc Dissertation. University of Calgary, Calgary.
  • Hainsworth F. R., Mercier T. & Wolf L. L. (1983) Floral arrangements and hummingbird feeding. Oecologia 58: 225229.
  • Harder L. D. & Aizen M. A. (2004) The functional significance of synchronous protandry in Alstroemeria aurea. Functional Ecology 18: 467474.
  • Harder L. D. & Barrett S. C. H. (1992) The energy cost of bee pollination for Pontederia cordata. Functional Ecology 6: 226233.
  • Harder L. D. & Barrett S. C. H. (1995) Mating cost of large floral displays in hermaphrodite plants. Nature 373: 512515.
  • Harder L. D. & Barrett S. C. H. (1996) Pollen dispersal and mating patterns in animal-pollinated plants. In: Lloyd D. G. & Barrett S. C. H. (eds). Floral Biology: Studies on Floral Evolution in Animal-Pollinated Plants. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 140190.
  • Harder L. D. & Cruzan M. B. (1990) An evaluation of the physiological and evolutionary influences of inflorescence size and flower depth on nectar production. Functional Ecology 4: 559572.
  • Harder L. D. & Thomson J. D. (1989) Evolutionary options for maximizing pollen dispersal of animal-pollinated plants. American Naturalist 133: 323344.
  • Harder L. D., Barrett S. C. H. & Cole W. W. (2000) The mating consequences of sexual segregation within inflorescences of flowering plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B 267: 315320.
  • 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. In: Chittka L. & Thomson J. D. (eds). Cognitive Ecology of Pollination. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 297317.
  • Heinrich B. (1975) Energetics of pollination. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 6: 139170.
  • Heinrich B. (1979) Resource heterogeneity and patterns of movement in foraging bumblebees. Oecologia 40: 235245.
  • Herlihy C. R. & Eckert C. G. (2002) Genetic cost of reproductive assurance in a self-fertilizing plant. Nature 416: 320322.
  • Hodges C. M. (1985) Bumble bee foraging: the threshold departure rule. Ecology 66: 179187.
  • Holsinger K. E. (1996) Pollination biology and the evolution of mating systems in flowering plants. Evolutionary Biology 29: 107149.
  • Ishii H. S. & Sakai S. (2001) Effects of display size and position on individual floral longevity in racemes of Narthecium asiaticum (Liliaceae). Functional Ecology 15: 396405.
  • Ishii H. S. & Sakai S. (2002) Temporal variation in floral display size and individual floral sex allocation in racemes of Narthecium asiaticum (Liliaceae). American Journal of Botany 89: 441446.
  • 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.
  • Johnson S. D. & Nilsson L. A. (1999) Pollen carryover, geitonogamy, and the evolution of deceptive pollination systems in orchids. Ecology 80: 26072619.
  • De Jong T. J., Klinkhamer P. G. L. & Van Staalduinen M. J. (1992) The consequences of pollination biology for selection of mass or extended blooming. Functional Ecology 6: 606615.
  • Jordan C. Y. (2000) The consequences of inflorescence architecture for bumble bee behaviour and plant mating. MSc Dissertation. University of Calgary, Calgary.
  • Kadmon R. & Shmida A. (1992) Departure rules used by bees foraging for nectar: a field test. Evolutionary Ecology 6: 142151.
  • Karrenberg S. & Jensen K. (2000) Effects of pollination and pollen source on the seed set of Pedicularis palustris. Folia Geobotanica 35: 191202.
  • Karron J. D., Mitchell R. J., Holmquist K. G., Bell J. M. & Funk B. (2004) The influence of floral display size on selfing rates in Mimulus ringens. Heredity 92: 242248.
  • Klinkhamer P. G. L., De Jong T. J. & Bruyn G.-J. (1989) Plant size and pollinator visitation in Cynoglossum officinale. Oikos 54: 201204.
  • Kudo G., Maeda T. & Narita K. (2001) Variation in floral sex allocation and reproductive success within inflorescences of Corydalis ambigua (Fumariaceae): pollination efficiency or resource limitation? Journal of Ecology 89: 4856.
  • Leclerc-Potvin C. & Ritland K. (1994) Modes of self-fertilization in Mimulus guttatus (Scrophulariaceae): a field experiment. American Journal of Botany 81: 199205.
  • Lloyd D. G. & Webb C. J. (1986) The avoidance of interference between the presentation of pollen and stigmas in angiosperms. I. Dichogamy. New Zealand Journal of Botany 24: 135162.
  • Meagher T. R. & Delph L. F. (2001) Individual flower demography, floral phenology and floral display size in Silene latifolia. Evolutionary Ecology Research 3: 845860.
  • Mitchell R. J., Karron J. D., Holmquist K. G. & Bell J. M. (2004) The influence of Mimulus ringens floral display size on pollinator visitation patterns. Functional Ecology 18: 116124.
  • Morgan M. T. & Schoen D. J. (1997) The role of theory in an emerging new plant reproductive biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12: 231234.
  • Nishikawa Y. (1998) The function of multiple flowers of a spring ephemeral, Gagea lutea (Liliaceae), with reference to blooming order. Canadian Journal of Botany 76: 14041411.
  • Ohashi K. (2002) Consequences of floral complexity for bumblebee-mediated geitonogamous self-pollination in Salvia nipponica Miq. (Labiatae). Evolution 56: 24142423.
  • Ohashi K. & Yahara T. (1998) Effects of variation in flower number on pollinator visits in Cirsium purpuratum (Asteraceae). American Journal of Botany 85: 219224.
  • Ohashi K. & Yahara T. (2001) Behavioural responses of pollinators to variation in floral display size and their influences on the evolution of floral traits. In: Chittka L. & Thomson J. D. (eds). Cognitive Ecology of Pollination. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 274296.
  • Parkin J. (1914) The evolution of the inflorescence. Linnean Journal of Botany 42: 511562.
  • Pleasants J. M. & Zimmerman M. (1990) The effect of inflorescence size on pollinator visitation of Delphinium nelsonii and Aconitum columbianum. Collectanea Botanica (Barcelona) 1990: 2139.
  • Pyke G. H. (1978) Optimal foraging in hummingbirds: testing the marginal value theorem. American Zoologist 18: 739752.
  • Pyke G. H. (1981) Hummingbird foraging on artificial inflorescences. Behaviour Analysis Letters 1: 1115.
  • Rademaker M. C. J., De Jong T. J. & Van Der Meijden E. (1999) Selfing rates in natural populations of Echium vulgare: a combined empirical and model approach. Functional Ecology 13: 828837.
  • Rasheed S. A. & Harder L. D. (1997) Foraging currencies for non-energetic resources: pollen collection by bumblebees. Animal Behaviour 54: 911926.
  • Robertson A. W. & Macnair M. R. (1995) The effects of floral display size on pollinator service to individual flowers of Myosotis and Mimulus. Oikos 72: 106114.
  • Routley M. B. & Husband B. C. (2003) The effect of protandry on siring success in Chamerion angustifolium (Onagraceae) with different inflorescence sizes. Evolution 57: 240248.
  • Schmid-Hempel P. & Speiser B. (1988) Effects of inflorescence size on pollination in Epilobium angustifolium. Oikos 53: 98104.
  • Schoen D. J. & Ashman T. L. (1995) The evolution of floral longevity: resource allocation to maintenance versus construction of repeated parts in modular organisms. Evolution 49: 131139.
  • Schoen D. J. & Dubuc M. (1990) The evolution of inflorescence size and number: a gamete-packaging strategy in plants. American Naturalist 135: 841857.
  • Schoen D. J. & Lloyd D. G. (1992) Self- and cross-fertilization in plants. III. Methods for studying modes and functional aspects of self-fertilization. International Journal of Plant Sciences 153: 381393.
  • Snow A. A., Spira T. P., Simpson R. & Klips R. A. (1996) The ecology of geitonogamous pollination. In: Lloyd D. G. & Barrett S. C. H. (eds). Floral Biology: Studies on Floral Evolution in Animal-Pollinated Plants. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 191216.
  • Stebbins G. L. (1973) Evolutionary trends in the inflorescence of angiosperms. Flora 162: 501528.
  • Stephenson A. G. (1982) When does outcrossing occur in a mass-flowering plant? Evolution 36: 762767.
  • Stephenson A. G. & Thomas W. W. (1977) Diurnal and nocturnal pollination of Catalpa speciosa (Bignoniaceae). Systematic Botany 2: 191198.
  • Thomson J. D. (1989) Deployment of ovules and pollen among flowers within ovules. Evolutionary Trends in Plants 3: 6568.
  • Troll W. (1964) Die Infloreszenzen: Typologie und Stellung Im Aufbau Des Vegetationskorpers. Fischer, Germany.
  • Van Doorn W. G. (1997) Effects of pollination on floral attraction and longevity. Journal of Experimental Botany 48: 16151622.
  • Vrieling K., Saumitou Laprade P., Cuguen J., Van Dijk H., De Jong T. J. & Klinkhamer P. G. L. (1999) Direct and indirect estimates of the selfing rate in small and large individuals of the bumblebee pollinated Cynoglossum officinale L (Boraginaceae). Ecology Letters 2: 331337.
  • Waddington K. D. & Heinrich B. (1979) The foraging movements of bumblebees on vertical ‘inflorescences’: an experimental analysis. Journal of Comparative Physiology A 134: 113117.
  • Weberling F. (1989) Morphology of Flowers and Inflorescences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Wolf L. L. & Hainsworth F. R. (1986) Information and hummingbird foraging at individual inflorescences of Ipomopsis aggregata. Oikos 46: 1522.
  • Wyatt R. (1982) Inflorescence architecture: how flower number, arrangement, and phenology affect pollination and fruit-set. American Journal of Botany 69: 585594.