Three Floral Volatiles Contribute to Differential Pollinator Attraction in Monkeyflowers (Mimulus)

Overview

Journal J Exp Biol

Specialty Biology

Date 2013 Nov 8

PMID 24198269

Citations 45

Authors

Kelsey J R P Byers

H D Bradshaw Jr

Jeffrey A Riffell

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Flowering plants employ a wide variety of signals, including scent, to attract the attention of pollinators. In this study we investigated the role of floral scent in mediating differential attraction between two species of monkeyflowers (Mimulus) reproductively isolated by pollinator preference. The emission rate and chemical identity of floral volatiles differ between the bumblebee-pollinated Mimulus lewisii and the hummingbird-pollinated M. cardinalis. Mimulus lewisii flowers produce an array of volatiles dominated by d-limonene, β-myrcene and E-β-ocimene. Of these three monoterpenes, M. cardinalis flowers produce only d-limonene, released at just 0.9% the rate of M. lewisii flowers. Using the Bombus vosnesenskii bumblebee, an important pollinator of M. lewisii, we conducted simultaneous gas chromatography with extracellular recordings in the bumblebee antennal lobe. Results from these experiments revealed that these three monoterpenes evoke significant neural responses, and that a synthetic mixture of the three volatiles evokes the same responses as the natural scent. Furthermore, the neural population shows enhanced responses to the M. lewisii scent over the scent of M. cardinalis. This neural response is reflected in behavior; in two-choice assays, bumblebees investigate artificial flowers scented with M. lewisii more frequently than ones scented with M. cardinalis, and in synthetic mixtures the three monoterpenes are necessary and sufficient to recapitulate responses to the natural scent of M. lewisii. In this system, floral scent alone is sufficient to elicit differential visitation by bumblebees, implying a strong role of scent in the maintenance of reproductive isolation between M. lewisii and M. cardinalis.

Citing Articles

The Convergent Evolution of Hummingbird Pollination Results in Repeated Floral Scent Loss Through Gene Downregulation.

Darragh K, Kay K, Ramirez S Mol Biol Evol. 2025; 42(2).

PMID: 39899329 PMC: 11848715. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msaf027.

Natural selection on floral volatiles and other traits can change with snowmelt timing and summer precipitation.

Powers J, Briggs H, Campbell D New Phytol. 2024; 245(1):332-346.

PMID: 39329349 PMC: 11617657. DOI: 10.1111/nph.20157.

The heat is on: reduced detection of floral scents after heatwaves in bumblebees.

Nooten S, Korten H, Schmitt T, Karpati Z Proc Biol Sci. 2024; 291(2029):20240352.

PMID: 39191280 PMC: 11349442. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2024.0352.

Floral scent changes in response to pollen removal are rare in buzz-pollinated Solanum.

Moore C, Farman D, Sarkinen T, Stevenson P, Vallejo-Marin M Planta. 2024; 260(1):15.

PMID: 38829528 PMC: 11147924. DOI: 10.1007/s00425-024-04403-4.

Tomato root specialized metabolites evolved through gene duplication and regulatory divergence within a biosynthetic gene cluster.

Kerwin R, Hart J, Fiesel P, Lou Y, Fan P, Jones A Sci Adv. 2024; 10(17):eadn3991.

PMID: 38657073 PMC: 11094762. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adn3991.

References

Schiestl F, Johnson S . Pollinator-mediated evolution of floral signals. Trends Ecol Evol. 2013; 28(5):307-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2013.01.019. View

Steiner K, Kaiser R, Dotterl S . Strong phylogenetic effects on floral scent variation of oil-secreting orchids in South Africa. Am J Bot. 2011; 98(10):1663-79. DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1100141. View

Klahre U, Gurba A, Hermann K, Saxenhofer M, Bossolini E, Guerin P . Pollinator choice in Petunia depends on two major genetic Loci for floral scent production. Curr Biol. 2011; 21(9):730-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2011.03.059. View

Beardsley P, Yen A, Olmstead R . AFLP phylogeny of Mimulus section Erythranthe and the evolution of hummingbird pollination. Evolution. 2003; 57(6):1397-410. DOI: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00347.x. View

Schemske D, Bradshaw Jr H . Pollinator preference and the evolution of floral traits in monkeyflowers (Mimulus). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999; 96(21):11910-5. PMC: 18386. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.96.21.11910. View

Ayasse M, Schiestl F, Paulus H, Lofstedt C, Hansson B, Ibarra F . Evolution of reproductive strategies in the sexually deceptive orchid Ophrys sphegodes: how does flower-specific variation of odor signals influence reproductive success?. Evolution. 2001; 54(6):1995-2006. DOI: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2000.tb01243.x. View

Aldridge G, Campbell D . Variation in pollinator preference between two Ipomopsis contact sites that differ in hybridization rate. Evolution. 2007; 61(1):99-110. DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00008.x. View

Shields V, Hildebrand J . Responses of a population of antennal olfactory receptor cells in the female moth Manduca sexta to plant-associated volatile organic compounds. J Comp Physiol A. 2001; 186(12):1135-51. DOI: 10.1007/s003590000165. View

Gray C, Maldonado P, Wilson M, McNaughton B . Tetrodes markedly improve the reliability and yield of multiple single-unit isolation from multi-unit recordings in cat striate cortex. J Neurosci Methods. 1995; 63(1-2):43-54. DOI: 10.1016/0165-0270(95)00085-2. View

10.

Riffell J, Lei H, Christensen T, Hildebrand J . Characterization and coding of behaviorally significant odor mixtures. Curr Biol. 2009; 19(4):335-40. PMC: 2677194. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.01.041. View

11.

Byers K, Sanders E, Riffell J . Identification of olfactory volatiles using gas chromatography-multi-unit recordings (GCMR) in the insect antennal lobe. J Vis Exp. 2013; (72):e4381. PMC: 3622093. DOI: 10.3791/4381. View

12.

Riffell J, Lei H, Hildebrand J . Neural correlates of behavior in the moth Manduca sexta in response to complex odors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009; 106(46):19219-26. PMC: 2780752. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0910592106. View

13.

Skorupski P, Doring T, Chittka L . Photoreceptor spectral sensitivity in island and mainland populations of the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2007; 193(5):485-94. DOI: 10.1007/s00359-006-0206-6. View

14.

Dudareva N, Cseke L, Blanc V, Pichersky E . Evolution of floral scent in Clarkia: novel patterns of S-linalool synthase gene expression in the C. breweri flower. Plant Cell. 1996; 8(7):1137-48. PMC: 161191. DOI: 10.1105/tpc.8.7.1137. View

15.

Wu C, Lowry D, Cooley A, Wright K, Lee Y, Willis J . Mimulus is an emerging model system for the integration of ecological and genomic studies. Heredity (Edinb). 2007; 100(2):220-30. DOI: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6801018. View

16.

Miyake T, Yafuso M . Floral scents affect reproductive success in fly-pollinated Alocasia odora (Araceae). Am J Bot. 2011; 90(3):370-6. DOI: 10.3732/ajb.90.3.370. View

17.

Schiestl F, Peakall R, Mant J, Ibarra F, Schulz C, Franke S . The chemistry of sexual deception in an orchid-wasp pollination system. Science. 2003; 302(5644):437-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.1087835. View

18.

Yuan Y, Sagawa J, Di Stilio V, Bradshaw Jr H . Bulk segregant analysis of an induced floral mutant identifies a MIXTA-like R2R3 MYB controlling nectar guide formation in Mimulus lewisii. Genetics. 2013; 194(2):523-8. PMC: 3664862. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.113.151225. View

19.

Riffell J, Alarcon R, Abrell L, Davidowitz G, Bronstein J, Hildebrand J . Behavioral consequences of innate preferences and olfactory learning in hawkmoth-flower interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(9):3404-9. PMC: 2265144. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0709811105. View

20.

Wright G, Lutmerding A, Dudareva N, Smith B . Intensity and the ratios of compounds in the scent of snapdragon flowers affect scent discrimination by honeybees (Apis mellifera). J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2005; 191(2):105-14. DOI: 10.1007/s00359-004-0576-6. View