Nectar and pollination drops: how different are they?

BACKGROUND: Pollination drops and nectars (floral nectars) are secretions related to plant reproduction. The pollination drop is the landing site for the majority of gymnosperm pollen, whereas nectar of angiosperm flowers represents a common nutritional resource for a large variety of pollinators. Extrafloral nectars also are known from all vascular plants, although among the gymnosperms they are restricted to the Gnetales. Extrafloral nectars are not generally involved in reproduction but serve as 'reward' for ants defending plants against herbivores (indirect defence). SCOPE: Although very different in their task, nectars and pollination drops share some features, e.g. basic chemical composition and eventual consumption by animals. This has led some authors to call these secretions collectively nectar. Modern techniques that permit chemical analysis and protein characterization have very recently added important information about these sugary secretions that appear to be much more than a 'reward' for pollinating (floral nectar) and defending animals (extrafloral nectar) or a landing site for pollen (pollination drop). CONCLUSIONS: Nectar and pollination drops contain sugars as the main components, but the total concentration and the relative proportions are different. They also contain amino acids, of which proline is frequently the most abundant. Proteomic studies have revealed the presence of common functional classes of proteins such as invertases and defence-related proteins in nectar (floral and extrafloral) and pollination drops. Invertases allow for dynamic rearrangement of sugar composition following secretion. Defence-related proteins provide protection from invasion by fungi and bacteria. Currently, only few species have been studied in any depth. The chemical composition of the pollination drop must be investigated in a larger number of species if eventual phylogenetic relationships are to be revealed. Much more information can be provided from further proteomic studies of both nectar and pollination drop that will contribute to the study of plant reproduction and evolution.

Pollination drop in Juniperus communis: response to deposited material.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The pollination drop is a liquid secretion produced by the ovule and exposed outside the micropyle. In many gymnosperms, pollen lands on the surface of the pollination drop, rehydrates and enters the ovule as the drop retracts. The objective of this work was to study the formation of the pollination drop in Juniperus communis, its carbohydrate composition and the response to deposition of conspecific pollen, foreign pollen and other particulate material, in an attempt to clarify the mechanism of pollination drop retraction. METHODS: Branches with female cones close to pollination drop secretion were collected. On the first day of pollination drop exposure, an eyelash mounted on a wooden stick with paraffin was used to collect pollen or silica gel particles, which were then deposited by contact with the drop. Volume changes in pollination drops were measured by using a stereomicroscope with a micrometer eyepiece 3 h after deposition. The volume of non-pollinated control drops was also recorded. On the first day of secretion, drops were also collected for sugar analysis by high-performance liquid chromatography. KEY RESULTS: The pollination drop persisted for about 12 d if not pollinated, and formed again after removal for up to four consecutive days. After pollination with viable conspecific pollen, the drop retracted quickly and did not form again. Partial withdrawal occurred after deposition of other biological and non-biological material. Fructose was the dominant sugar; glucose was also present but at a much lower percentage. CONCLUSIONS: Sugar analysis confirmed the general trend of fructose dominance in gymnosperm pollination drops. Complete pollination drop withdrawal appears to be triggered by a biochemical mechanism resulting from interaction between pollen and drop constituents. The results of particle deposition suggest the existence of a non-specific, particle-size-dependent mechanism that induces partial pollination drop withdrawal. These results suggest that the non-specific response may decrease the probability of pollen landing on the drop, reducing pollination efficiency.