title: Flowering phenology, fruiting success and progressive deterioration of pollination in an early-flowering geophyte.
abstract: Spatio-temporal patterns of snowmelt and flowering times affect fruiting success in Erythronium grandiflorum Pursh (Liliaceae) in subalpine western Colorado, USA. From 1990 to 1995, I measured the consistency across years of snowmelt patterns and flowering times along a permanent transect. In most years since 1993, I have monitored fruit set in temporal cohorts (early- to late-flowering groups of plants) at one site. To assess 'pollination limitation', I have also conducted supplemental hand-pollination experiments at various times through the blooming season. The onset of blooming is determined by snowmelt, with the earliest years starting a month before the latest years owing to variation in winter snowpack accumulation. Fruit set is diminished or prevented entirely by killing frosts in some years, most frequently but not exclusively for the earlier cohorts. When frosts do not limit fruit set, pollination limitation is frequent, especially in the earlier cohorts. Pollination limitation is strongest for middle cohorts: it tends to be negated by frost in early cohorts and ameliorated by continuing emergence of bumble-bee queens in later cohorts. This lily appears to be poorly synchronized with its pollinators. Across the years of the study, pollination limitation appears to be increasing, perhaps because the synchronization is getting worse.
authors.affiliation: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, 25 Harbord Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 3G5. james.thomson@utoronto.ca
authors.forename: James D
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Thomson
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001516:Bees; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003120:Colorado; D035264:Flowers / Q000502:physiology*; D005638:Fruit / Q000502:physiology*; D019668:Liliaceae / Q000254:growth & development*; D054817:Pollination; D012621:Seasons; D012914:Snow
references.citation: Am Nat. 2009 Jun;173(6):819-30
references.pmid: 19335224
references.citation: Ecology. 2010 Feb;91(2):431-40
references.pmid: 20392008
references.citation: Ecology. 2007 Feb;88(2):271-81
references.pmid: 17479745
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 1992 Aug;7(8):274-6
references.pmid: 21236029
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Feb 15;97(4):1630-3
references.pmid: 10677510
references.citation: Evolution. 1993 Jun;47(3):915-924
references.pmid: 28567910
references.citation: Am J Bot. 2009 Oct;96(10):1821-9
references.pmid: 21622303
references.citation: Ecology. 2008 Feb;89(2):353-62
references.pmid: 18409425
references.citation: Environ Entomol. 2012 Dec;41(6):1332-49
references.pmid: 23321080
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2009 Feb;12(2):184-95
references.pmid: 19049509
references.citation: Oecologia. 1983 Aug;59(1):135-40
references.pmid: 25024159
references.citation: Am J Bot. 1998 Dec;85(12):1672-9
references.pmid: 21680328
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Jul;20(7):367-73
references.pmid: 16701398
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2007 Aug;10(8):710-7
references.pmid: 17594426