Effect of expanded variation in anther position on pollinator visitation to wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum.

Background and Aims: Plant-pollinator interactions shape the evolution of flowers. Floral attraction and reward traits have often been shown to affect pollinator behaviour, but the possible effect of efficiency traits on visitation behaviour has rarely been addressed. Anther position, usually considered a trait that influences efficiency of pollen deposition on pollinators, was tested here for its effect on pollinator visitation rates and visit duration in flowers of wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum . Methods: Artificial selection lines from two experiments that expanded the naturally occurring phenotypic variation in anther position were used. In one experiment, plant lines were selected either to increase or to decrease anther exsertion. The other experiment decreased anther dimorphism, which resulted in increased short stamen exsertion. The hypothesis was that increased exsertion would increase visitation of pollen foragers due to increased visual attraction. Another hypothesis was that exsertion of anthers above the corolla would interfere with nectar foragers and increase the duration of visit per flower. Key Results: In the exsertion selection experiment, increased exsertion of both short and long stamens resulted in an increased number of fly visits per plant, and in the dimorphism experiment bee visits increased with increased short stamen exsertion. The duration of visits of nectar feeders declined significantly with increasing long stamen exsertion, which was opposite to the hypothesis. Conclusions: Until now, anther position was considered to be an efficiency trait to enhance pollen uptake and deposition. Anther position in wild radish is shown here also to have an ecological significance in attracting pollen foragers. This study suggests an additional adaptive role for anther position beyond efficiency, and highlights the multiple ecological functions of floral traits in plant-pollinator interactions.

Estimates of the average strength of natural selection are not inflated by sampling error or publication bias.

Kingsolver et al.'s review of phenotypic selection gradients from natural populations provided a glimpse of the form and strength of selection in nature and how selection on different organisms and traits varies. Because this review's underlying database could be a key tool for answering fundamental questions concerning natural selection, it has spawned discussion of potential biases inherent in the review process. Here, we explicitly test for two commonly discussed sources of bias: sampling error and publication bias. We model the relationship between variance among selection gradients and sample size that sampling error produces by subsampling large empirical data sets containing measurements of traits and fitness. We find that this relationship was not mimicked by the review data set and therefore conclude that sampling error does not bias estimations of the average strength of selection. Using graphical tests, we find evidence for bias against publishing weak estimates of selection only among very small studies (N<38). However, this evidence is counteracted by excess weak estimates in larger studies. Thus, estimates of average strength of selection from the review are less biased than is often assumed. Devising and conducting straightforward tests for different biases allows concern to be focused on the most troublesome factors.