Pollen dispersal in Yucca filamentosa (Agavaceae): the paradox of self-pollination behavior by Tegeticula yuccasella (Prodoxidae).

We investigated pollen dispersal in an obligate pollination mutualism between Yucca filamentosa and Tegeticula yuccasella. Yucca moths are the only documented pollinator of yuccas, and moth larvae feed solely on developing yucca seeds. The quality of pollination by a female moth affects larval survival because flowers receiving small amounts of pollen or self-pollen have a high abscission probability, and larvae die in abscised flowers. We tested the prediction that yucca moths primarily perform outcross pollinations by using fluorescent dye to track pollen dispersal in five populations of Y. filamentosa. Dye transfers within plants were common in all populations (mean ± 1 SE, 55 ± 3.0%), indicating that moths frequently deposit self-pollen. Distance of dye transfers ranged from 0 to 50 m, and the mean number of flowering plants between the pollen donor and recipient was 5 (median = 0), suggesting that most pollen was transferred among near neighbors. A multilocus genetic estimate of outcrossing based on seedlings matured from open-pollinated fruits at one site was 94 ± 6% (mean ± 1 SD). We discuss why moths frequently deposit self-pollen to the detriment of their offspring and compare the yucca-yucca moth interaction with other obligate pollinator mutualisms in which neither pollinator nor plant benefit from self-pollination.

[1]  J. L. Doust,et al.  Nectar production, flowering phenology, and strategies for pollination. , 1988 .

[2]  B. Ramírez.  HOST SPECIFICITY OF FIG WASPS (AGAONIDAE). , 1970 .

[3]  S. Krauss.  Restricted gene flow within the morphologically complex species Persoonia mollis (Proteaceae): contrasting evidence from the mating system and pollen dispersal , 1994, Heredity.

[4]  D. Levin.  Dispersal Versus Gene Flow in Plants , 1981 .

[5]  M. V. Price,et al.  Crossing Distance Effects on Prezygotic Performance in Plants: An Argument for Female Choice , 1993 .

[6]  O. Pellmyr,et al.  Evolutionary stability of mutualism between yuccas and yucca moths , 1994, Nature.

[7]  D. Campbell.  COMPARING POLLEN DISPERSAL AND GENE FLOW IN A NATURAL POPULATION , 1991, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[8]  A. E. Weis,et al.  Differential abortion in the yucca , 1995, Nature.

[9]  L. Harder,et al.  Pollen Dispersal and Mating Patterns in Animal-Pollinated Plants , 1996 .

[10]  J. Hamrick,et al.  Genetic diversity and population structure of Yucca filamentosa (Agavaceae). , 1998, American journal of botany.

[11]  O. Pellmyr.  Systematic revision of the yucca moths in the Tegeticula yuccasella complex (Lepidoptera: Prodoxidae) north of Mexico , 1999 .

[12]  M. Anstett,et al.  Figs and fig pollinators: evolutionary conflicts in a coevoled mutualism. , 1997, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[13]  C. Herrera.  Components of pollinator "quality": comparative analysis of a diverse insect assemblage , 1987 .

[14]  J. D. Karron,et al.  Comparison of pollinator flight movements and gene dispersal patterns in Mimulus ringens , 1995, Heredity.

[15]  O. Pellmyr,et al.  POLLEN-MEDIATED SELECTIVE ABORTION IN YUCCAS AND ITS CONSEQUENCES FOR THE PLANT–POLLINATOR MUTUALISM , 2000 .

[16]  N. Waser,et al.  CHAPTER 10 – The Adaptive Nature of Floral Traits: Ideas and Eviaence , 1983 .

[17]  P. Cowen,et al.  Why is dieting so difficult? , 1995, Nature.

[18]  David W. Inouye,et al.  ENDANGERED MUTUALISMS: The Conservation of Plant-Pollinator Interactions , 1998 .

[19]  A. Stephenson.  Flower and Fruit Abortion: Proximate Causes and Ultimate Functions , 1981 .

[20]  C. Fenster,et al.  GENE FLOW IN CHAMAECRISTA FASCICULATA (LEGUMINOSAE) I. GENE DISPERSAL , 1991, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[21]  C. Jacobi,et al.  Dynamics of pollination: A model of insect-mediated pollen transfer in self-incompatible plants , 1998 .

[22]  Theodore H. Fleming,et al.  The evolution of obligate pollination mutualisms: senita cactus and senita moth , 1998, Oecologia.

[23]  J. Nason,et al.  The breeding structure of a tropical keystone plant resource , 1998, Nature.

[24]  J. Schmitt.  POLLINATOR FORAGING BEHAVIOR AND GENE DISPERSAL IN SENECIO (COMPOSITAE) , 1980, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[25]  J. Lattke.  A new species of fungus‐growing ant and its implications for attine phylogeny (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) , 1999 .

[26]  N. Ellstrand.  Gene flow by pollen: implications for plant conservation genetics , 1992 .

[27]  D. Shaw,et al.  A multilocus estimator of mating system parameters in plant populations. , 1981, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  Lars Chittka,et al.  Generalization in Pollination Systems, and Why it Matters , 1996 .

[29]  J. Powell,et al.  Interrelationships of yuccas and yucca moths. , 1992, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[30]  J. Bronstein,et al.  Variation in reproductive success within a subtropical fig/pollinator mutualism , 1996 .

[31]  K. Ritland.  A Series of FORTRAN Computer Programs for Estimating Plant Mating Systems , 1990 .

[32]  Daniel H. Janzen,et al.  How to be a Fig , 1979 .

[33]  J. Keeley,et al.  Seed predation due to the yucca moth symbiosis , 1984 .

[34]  J. Bronstein.  Mutualism, Antagonism, and the Fig‐Pollinator Interaction , 1988 .

[35]  A. E. Weis,et al.  Inbreeding and outcrossing in Yucca whipplei: consequences for the reproductive success of plant and pollinator , 1998 .

[36]  W. Schaffer,et al.  The Adaptive Significance of Variations in Reproductive Habit in the Agavaceae II: Pollinator Foraging Behavior and Selection for Increased Reproductive Expenditure , 1979 .

[37]  C. Baskin,et al.  Seeds: Ecology, Biogeography, and, Evolution of Dormancy and Germination , 1998 .

[38]  B. Schaal.  Measurement of gene flow in Lupinus texensis , 1980, Nature.

[39]  J. Bronstein,et al.  CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF WITHIN‐TREE PHENOLOGICAL PATTERNS IN THE FLORIDA STRANGLING FIG, FICUS AUREA (MORACEAE) , 1992 .

[40]  A. Tyre,et al.  Cheating in an obligate mutualism : how often do yucca moths benefit yuccas ? , 1995 .

[41]  J. Rasplus.  The one-to-one species specificity of the Ficus-Agaoninae mutualism: how casual? , 1996 .

[42]  Arthur Cronquist,et al.  Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada , 2004 .

[43]  O. Pellmyr,et al.  Non-random fruit retention in Yucca filamentosa: consequences for an obligate mutualism , 1997 .

[44]  C. Riley.  Some interrelations of plants and insects , 1892 .

[45]  Y. Linhart,et al.  Reproductive consequences of interactions between Yucca glauca (Agavaceae) and Tegeticula yuccasella (Lepidoptera) in Colorado , 1994 .

[46]  W. Trelease.  The yucceae. By William Trelease. (From the thirteenth Annual report of the Missouri botanical garden.) , 1902 .

[47]  R. Wyatt,et al.  PATERNITY ANALYSIS IN A NATURAL POPULATION OF ASCLEPIAS EXALTATA: MULTIPLE PATERNITY, FUNCTIONAL GENDER, AND THE “POLLEN‐DONATION HYPOTHESIS” , 1990, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[48]  M. Anstett,et al.  Consequences of protecting flowers in a fig: a one-way trip for pollinators? , 1996 .

[49]  O. Pellmyr,et al.  Genetic consequences of specialization: yucca moth behavior and self-pollination in yuccas , 1997, Oecologia.

[50]  M. V. Price,et al.  A Comparison of Pollen and Fluorescent Dye Carry‐Over by Natural Pollinators of Ipomopsis Aggregata (Polemoniaceae) , 1982 .

[51]  O. Pellmyr.  POLLINATING SEED EATERS: WHY IS ACTIVE POLLINATION SO RARE? , 1997 .