Some Unresolved Issues of Measuring the Efficiency of Pollinators: Experimentally Testing and Assessing the Predictive Power of Different Methods
Table 3
Fruit/seed set in flowers of four plant species resulting from a single visit of three foraging modes of different visitors.
Visitor species
Per cent fruit/ seed set in flowers of four plants due to a single visit of three foraging modes of different visitors
Only nectar foraging (N)
Only pollen foraging (P)
Nectar as well as pollen foraging (NP)
Alfalfa
A. dorsata
0
100 (12.0±0.0)
100 (12.0±0.0)
A. florea
0
-
0
C. cephalotes
-
-
100 (12.0 ±0.0)
C. rubripes
-
-
100 (12.0 ±0.0)
M. nana
-
-
100 (12.0 ±0.0)
Toria
A. ilerda
-
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
A. dorsata
-
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
A. florea
0
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
A. mellifera
0
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
100 (24.0 ±0.0)
Carrot
A. leaena
-
100 (2.0 ±0.0)
100 (2.0 ±0.0)
A. florea
-
100 (2.0 ±0.0)
100 (2.0 ±0.0)
Syrphid sp.
-
100 (2.0 ±0.0)
100 (2.0 ±0.0)
Bath sponge
A. florea
0
100 (147.0 ±28.3)
100 (155.0 ±39.8)
Halictus sp.
0
100 (205.0 ±43.6)
100 (198.0 ±48.3)
Melissodes sp.
-
100 (263.0 ±58.5)
100 (272.0 ±69.4)
X. fenestrata
-
100 (703.0 ±146.2)
100 (693.0 ±132.8)
Based on 40 observations, figures in the parentheses represent number of seeds set per flower; t (p> 0.05; d) between P and NP = nonsignificant for all the plants; F (p> 0.05) between pollinators = nonsignificant for alfalfa (), toria (), and carrot (); F (p< 0.05, ) between pollinators = significant for bath sponge; -: pollinator behavior was absent.
