An Experimental Evaluation of Traits That Influence the Sexual Behaviour of Pollinators in Sexually Deceptive Orchids

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Experimental Evaluation of Traits That Influence the Sexual Behaviour of Pollinators in Sexually Deceptive Orchids An experimental evaluation of traits that influence the sexual behaviour of pollinators in sexually deceptive orchids Ryan D. Phillips1,2,3* & Rod Peakall1 5 1 Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia 2 Kings Park and Botanic Garden, The Botanic Garden and Parks Authority, West Perth, 6005, Western Australia, Australia 10 3 Department of Ecology, Environment & Evolution, La Trobe University, Victoria, 3086, Australia *Corresponding author: email: [email protected] Ph: 61 2 61252866 Fax: 61 2 61255573 15 Running head: floral traits and sexual behaviour Abstract 20 Pollination by sexual deception of male insects is perhaps one of the most remarkable cases of mimicry in the plant kingdom. However, understanding the influence of floral traits on pollinator behaviour in sexually deceptive orchids is challenging, due to the risk of confounding changes in floral odour when manipulating morphology. Here, we investigated the floral traits influencing the sexual response of male Zaspilothynnus nigripes (Tiphiidae) 25 wasps, a pollinator of two distantly related sexually deceptive orchids with contrasting floral architecture, Caladenia pectinata and Drakaea livida. In D. livida the chemical sexual attractant is emitted from the labellum, while in C. pectinata it is produced from the distal sepal tips, allowing manipulative experiments. When controlling for visual cues there was no difference in long distance attraction, though the floral odour of D. livida induced copulation 30 more frequently than that of C. pectinata. The role of colour in pollinator sexual attraction was equivocal, indicating that colour may not be a strong constraint on the initial evolution of sexual deception. The frequency of wasp visitors landing on C. pectinata decreased when the amount of floral odour was reduced, but attempted copulation rates were enhanced when the source of floral odour was associated with the labellum. These latter variables may represent 1 35 axes of selection that operate across many sexually deceptive species. Nonetheless, the observed variation in floral traits suggests flexibility in how sexual deception can be achieved. Keywords: sexual deception, mimicry, floral traits, pollinator behaviour 40 Introduction Pollination by sexual deception, where male insects are attracted to the flower by chemical 45 and/or physical mimicry of a female insect (Ellis & Johnson, 2010; Schiestl et al., 1999, Schiestl et al., 2003; de Jager & Peakall, 2016), is perhaps one of the most remarkable of all pollination strategies. The investigation of plants with unconventional floral forms is revealing an increasing diversity of plants pollinated via this strategy (Vereecken et al., 2012; Phillips et al., 2014b; Arakaki et al., 2016). Consequently, sexual deception is now known to 50 be geographically widespread, and to involve at least several hundred species, with examples from Europe, Australia, South and central America, southern Africa and Asia (Singer, 2002; Blanco & Barboza, 2005; Ellis & Johnson, 2010; Vereecken et al., 2012; Phillips et al., 2014b; Arakaki et al., 2016; Bohman et al., 2016a). Despite recently discoveries in the Asteraceae (Ellis & Johnson, 2010) and Iridaceae (Vereecken et al., 2012), the vast majority 55 of species using this strategy are in the Orchidaceae, where at least 20 genera are known to contain sexually deceptive species (Johnson & Schiestl, 2016; Bohman et al., 2016a). While there is a strong trend towards reduced floral size, dull colouration and insectiform structure of the labellum (Johnson & Schiestl, 2016), there are also sexually deceptive species with large, sometimes colourful flowers that lack insectiform structures (Phillips et al., 2009, 60 2017; Phillips & Peakall 2018) raising the important question of which traits are needed to achieve the sexual attraction of pollinators. In sexually deceptive pollination systems, one intuitively expects selection to favour traits that increase sexual behavior at the flower, since more time on the flower, or more vigorous 65 sexual behavior, may increase the frequency of pollen removal and pollination (de Jager & Peakall, 2018). However, teasing apart the effect of various floral traits on sexual behavior raises some important methodological complexities. For example, in many sexually deceptive orchids, pollinator attraction is achieved via chemical cues (Kullenberg, 1961; Stoutamire, 2 1983; Schiestl et al., 2003; Bohman et al., 2016a). Therefore, when experimentally 70 disentangling the role of the chemical, visual and morphological cues, any manipulation must avoid confounding floral odour effects with other cues (de Jager & Ellis 2012; de Jager & Peakall, 2016, 2018). This is not so easy to achieve in most genera of sexually deceptive orchids where odour release occurs from the labellum (Kullenberg, 1961; Phillips et al., 2013; Phillips et al., 2014b; de Jager & Peakall, 2016), meaning that labellum shape or size 75 cannot be manipulated without the need to control for odour. Furthermore, interspecific comparison of the effect of floral traits on pollinator behaviour is also confounded when plants use different pollinator species. This is a particularly acute challenge for sexually deceptive orchids where pollinator specificity is extreme, and pollinator sharing rare or absent in most genera (but see Gaskett & Herberstein, 2010; Gogler et al., 2009; Phillips et 80 al., 2017 for some exceptions). In order to understand the floral traits that affect the attraction of sexually deceived pollinators, in this study we take advantage of an exceptional case of pollinator sharing where the thynnine wasp Zaspilothynnus nigripes (Guérin, 1842) pollinates two distantly related 85 orchids, Caladenia pectinata R.S. Rogers and Drakaea livida J.Drumm., by sexual deception (Phillips et al., 2013; Fig. 1). Unlike D. livida, C. pectinata produces the sexual attractant entirely from glands on the distal sepal tips rather than the labellum (hereafter called clubs), meaning that other floral traits can be manipulated without altering the amount of sexual attractant produced. Interestingly, the copulation rate is over three times higher in D. livida 90 than C. pectinata (Phillips et al., 2013), providing the opportunity to explore traits that affect levels of sexual attraction. Research on other sexually deceptive systems has provided some clues about the factors that are likely to be important for enhancing sexual attraction. For example, experiments using 95 synthesized semio-chemicals have demonstrated that both changes in the blend of chemicals produced, and the quantity of compounds released, affect the number of pollinators responding and the frequency of attempted copulation (Ayasse et al., 2003; Schiestl, 2004; Vereecken & Schiestl, 2008; Peakall et al., 2010; Bohman et al., 2014; Bohman et al., 2017; Xu et al., 2017). In some sexually deceptive orchids, colour also appears to be important for 100 locating the flower, either through visual mimicry or colour contrast to maximize detectability (Streinzer et al., 2009; Gaskett & Herberstein, 2010; Gaskett et al., 2016), though the effect of colour on copulation rate is unknown in any orchid. Once pollinators 3 have landed on the flower, morphological traits are known to enhance copulation rates and duration at least in some systems (de Jager & Ellis, 2012; Phillips et al., 2014b; de Jager & 105 Peakall, 2016, 2018). For example, experimental reduction in labellum size of Chiloglottis, while avoiding removal of the odour producing callus, showed that a labellum size corresponding to the length of the mimicked female elicited a longer duration of attempted copulation than smaller labella (de Jager & Peakall, 2016). 110 Here, we apply a series of innovative floral manipulations to test if three floral traits (amount of floral odour, site of odour release, and colour), which are predicted to affect reproductive success in sexually deceptive orchids, influence the extent of pollinator response and sexual behaviour with the flower. Further, we seek to understand the basis of pronounced variation in pollinator sexual behaviour with different species of sexually deceptive orchid (see Fig. 1). 115 Due to the large size of Z. nigipres (approximately 20 mm body length) and its vigorous copulatory behaviour with the flower, in this system pollinator responses can be readily classified and into three discrete steps, long-distance attraction, landing on the flower, and attempted copulation. Such a classification is not always possible in other sexually deceptive species where the pollinator and flower is small and/or the sexual behavior is more subtle 120 (e.g. Phillips et al., 2014b). Further, we can subdivide ‘sexual attraction’ into two quantifiable components. We define ‘enhanced sexual response’ as a significant increase in the total number of wasps responding to the flower. We define ‘enhanced sexual behavior’ as a significant increase in the proportion of wasps landing on the flower, and/or the proportion of landing wasps that attempt copulation with the flower. In this context, we address four 125 specific questions for Z. nigripes: (i) Is there interspecific variation in the attractiveness of the floral odour? (ii) Does a decrease in the amount of floral odour reduce sexual attraction? (iii) Does sexual attraction increase when the attractant is associated with the labellum? (iv) Does a dull-coloured labellum enhance sexual attraction? 130 Materials and
Recommended publications
  • POLLINATION SYNDROMES and FLORAL SPECIALIZATION Charles
    31 Oct 2004 12:34 AR AR229-ES35-14.tex AR229-ES35-14.sgm LaTeX2e(2002/01/18) P1: GJB 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132347 Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2004. 35:375–403 doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132347 Copyright c 2004 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved First published online as a Review in Advance on July 26, 2004 POLLINATION SYNDROMES AND FLORAL SPECIALIZATION Charles B. Fenster,1 W. Scott Armbruster,2 Paul Wilson,3 Michele R. Dudash,1 and James D. Thomson4 1Department of Biology, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742; email: [email protected]; [email protected] 2School of Biological Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, PO1 2DY, United Kingdom; Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway; Institute of Arctic Biology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775; email: [email protected] 3Department of Biology, California State University, Northridge, California 91330-8303; email: [email protected] 4Department of Zoology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G5; email: [email protected] KeyWords floral evolution, mutualism, plant-animal interaction, pollinator, pollination ■ Abstract Floral evolution has often been associated with differences in pollina- tion syndromes. Recently, this conceptual structure has been criticized on the grounds that flowers attract a broader spectrum of visitors than one might expect based on their syndromes and that flowers often diverge without excluding one type of pollinator in favorofanother. Despite these criticisms, we show that pollination syndromes provide great utility in understanding the mechanisms of floral diversification. Our conclusions are based on the importance of organizing pollinators into functional groups according to presumed similarities in the selection pressures they exert.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vegetation of the Western Blue Mountains Including the Capertee, Coxs, Jenolan & Gurnang Areas
    Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) The Vegetation of the Western Blue Mountains including the Capertee, Coxs, Jenolan & Gurnang Areas Volume 1: Technical Report Hawkesbury-Nepean CMA CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY The Vegetation of the Western Blue Mountains (including the Capertee, Cox’s, Jenolan and Gurnang Areas) Volume 1: Technical Report (Final V1.1) Project funded by the Hawkesbury – Nepean Catchment Management Authority Information and Assessment Section Metropolitan Branch Environmental Protection and Regulation Division Department of Environment and Conservation July 2006 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project has been completed by the Special thanks to: Information and Assessment Section, Metropolitan Branch. The numerous land owners including State Forests of NSW who allowed access to their Section Head, Information and Assessment properties. Julie Ravallion The Department of Natural Resources, Forests NSW and Hawkesbury – Nepean CMA for Coordinator, Bioregional Data Group comments on early drafts. Daniel Connolly This report should be referenced as follows: Vegetation Project Officer DEC (2006) The Vegetation of the Western Blue Mountains. Unpublished report funded by Greg Steenbeeke the Hawkesbury – Nepean Catchment Management Authority. Department of GIS, Data Management and Database Environment and Conservation, Hurstville. Coordination Peter Ewin Photos Kylie Madden Vegetation community profile photographs by Greg Steenbeeke Greg Steenbeeke unless otherwise noted. Feature cover photo by Greg Steenbeeke. All Logistics
    [Show full text]
  • ACT, Australian Capital Territory
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Orchidaceae: Genera and Species (12/1/2004)
    AUSTRALIAN ORCHID NAME INDEX (21/1/2008) by Mark A. Clements Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research/Australian National Herbarium GPO Box 1600 Canberra ACT 2601 Australia Corresponding author: [email protected] INTRODUCTION The Australian Orchid Name Index (AONI) provides the currently accepted scientific names, together with their synonyms, of all Australian orchids including those in external territories. The appropriate scientific name for each orchid taxon is based on data published in the scientific or historical literature, and/or from study of the relevant type specimens or illustrations and study of taxa as herbarium specimens, in the field or in the living state. Structure of the index: Genera and species are listed alphabetically. Accepted names for taxa are in bold, followed by the author(s), place and date of publication, details of the type(s), including where it is held and assessment of its status. The institution(s) where type specimen(s) are housed are recorded using the international codes for Herbaria (Appendix 1) as listed in Holmgren et al’s Index Herbariorum (1981) continuously updated, see [http://sciweb.nybg.org/science2/IndexHerbariorum.asp]. Citation of authors follows Brummit & Powell (1992) Authors of Plant Names; for book abbreviations, the standard is Taxonomic Literature, 2nd edn. (Stafleu & Cowan 1976-88; supplements, 1992-2000); and periodicals are abbreviated according to B-P- H/S (Bridson, 1992) [http://www.ipni.org/index.html]. Synonyms are provided with relevant information on place of publication and details of the type(s). They are indented and listed in chronological order under the accepted taxon name. Synonyms are also cross-referenced under genus.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation and Floristics of Butterleaf National Park, Butterleaf State Conservation Area and the Bezzants Lease
    Vegetation and Floristics of Butterleaf National Park, Butterleaf State Conservation Area and the Bezzants Lease Dr John T. Hunter May 2011 23 Kendall Rd, Invergowrie NSW, 2350 Ph. & Fax: (02) 6775 2452 Email: [email protected] A Report to the New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service & the Nature Conservation Trust of NSW i Vegetation of Butterleaf & Bezzants Lease Summary The vegetation of the Butterleaf National Park and State Conservation Area and Bezzant’s Lease is described and mapped (scale 1:25 000). Nine communities and three sub-associations are defined based on classification (Kulczynski association). These eight communities and three sub-associations were mapped based on ground truthing, air photo interpretation and landform. The communities described and their status is: Floristic Community Area Reservation Status C1a: Eucalyptus radiata – E. Not listed as a community of concern though 1,875 ha campanulata – E. obliqua likely a unique association within the area. C1b: Eucalyptus obliqua – E. Not listed as a community of concern. 263 ha brunnea – E. saligna C1c: Eucalyptus campanulata Not listed as a community of concern. 250 ha – E. obliqua – E. saligna C2: Eucalyptus acaciiformis – Likely to be included as an Endangered Angophora floribunda Ecological Community within the Montane 8.7 ha Peatlands and Swamps determination of the TSC Act. C3: Eucalyptus caliginosa – Not listed as a community of concern though E. bridgesiana – E. 433 ha likely a unique association within the area. laevopinea C4: Eucalyptus nova-anglica Would fall within the Endangered Ecological – E. acaciiformis – E. 39.8 ha Community New England Peppermint subtilior Woodland on the TSC and EPBC Acts.
    [Show full text]
  • 080057-14.002.Pdf
    IBroUparequeusrp qser; Surceldopnlcur senbruqcel eseql sexeldruocserceds eyqerre,r dlpcrSoloce pue ,tllecrqderSoe?Jo uopnlosar oql pal€llllJpJ,{puer8 er'uq leueluru 3u1,rqur uorleue,ruoqelndod 'sueulceds Surluounropro; senbruqJel,trou unuzqreq;o uo!lBulruBXoIBuorlueAuoc ot uonrpppuI '!.ErJeJlsnv lsad\-qlnos Jo sprqcro,,sru^\oJg 'peuelsaJql ? uptuJJogJo uorlrpepuoces aqt ur posnsaureu tdrrcsnuutu elspJlel puu peJeprsuoJexsl IEJeAesequJsap IlrA\ solJes eqJ I6rI ut sprqrJouerleJlsnv uelsed\Jo suorlJelloc?qroauord,selzuel^I 'dno'tg ppqrqJrv Jo uo.rluJqalerFruueluaorq eql spJel\ol uo,rtnqlJluoca sr serJesaq; uorl€^rosuoJ pue ,{pnls prqcJo a^rleN ueJlellsnv ualso^d aql Jo sroquau ql!^\ uoueroqulloour pelrnpuoJ 'suorlelonbe^oqu aql ur ppre?z1rgpue puotuuruC dq ol pepnllBpuDI eqlJo sexelduoc selcedscrqdrorudlod pe,rloserun dlsnor,lerd ,{ueru e,ruq "rg'\ qcrq,r u:eue8peqle pue'lpwloaryor1 oruapolo) rJosesrcoJ lI sapmap o,r,r1lsud eql re,ro pelaldruocsarpnls d:nu€qJaq pup pleg alrsuelxeuo peseqsr seuoser{J 'uorSorsrql uror; eraue8o1 de1 'splqcro ^\eu u sello,tl sB uerTe4snvtuelse,r-qlnos;o ,{ruouoxdleql uo seuese ol uopcnporlullerouaE e sepr,rordreded sq1 'OOO) gZ-t:() y1o1s1tnp uJeuo?ol i(ol pup sldocuoccrurouoxel 'suorlrellos 'u^ 'reddog dpee;o ,{:o1sr111 :f?oloplqrro uellerlsnv uelseld ol suollnqrruoC d'V olg yq'g pBrtsqY (gggl)plure?4rg ,, fropu;spusaq 1r plo^uo1 elqlssod eq ll JJlouu€c solJedseuo repun seUorJBA tcupsrp fre,,r;o requnu lBer8 B apnlJur oL, (gg9 :9791)puouluruq .. perrpore {eql ueqnAecuera;;rp eql Folepo1 pelzznd 'elqruJecsrp
    [Show full text]
  • Species List
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Make Not Only Macroscopic Studies, but Also Meticulous Enlargements
    - 612 - iii. Artists Some amateur enthusiasts were famed more for their drawings than for their collections of plants. Those First Fleeters and other early settlers who shared Captain John Hunters "pretty turn for 315 drawing" were worthily succeeded. Luch of the later botanical art was inspired by the same old motives. Some were simply moved "by the 316 sight of plants with quaint and beautiful characteristics" to paint them for personal pleasure, or for the pleasure and information of friends 317 ; others sketched, painted or photographed plants because they were commissioned to do so or because such work came into their professional ambit; some were moved by purely scientific motives to make not only macroscopic studies, but also meticulous enlargements of dissections to indicate previously unknown morphological characteristics 318 However motivated in hobby or profession, the preparation of faithful delineations of plants had the scientifically significant effects of concentrating the observational skill of the artists themselves, and of developing botanical awareness in others. vhen an artists work was published his contribution to science was immeasurably greater, but the 315 Surgeon John Valites term for Hunters artistic skill. See Thesis I,-)p.94-95. For the botanical art of John Hunter, George Raper, Henry Brewer, the "Port Jackson Painter", Thomas Watling, Ferdinand Bauer and John William Lewin, see Thesis I, Chapter VI. 316 Thesis I,p.92, 317 It is interesting to note that during the 1040s, "Mrs. Jones" of 10 OConnell Street, Sydney, undertook to make and send to England "wax replicas of Telopea speciosissima, Rock Lily, etc. from £4-4-0 for collections".
    [Show full text]
  • Intra- Und Interspezifische Chemische Kommunikation Von Insekten
    Intra- und interspezifische chemische Kommunikation von Insekten Identifizierung und Synthese flüchtiger Signalstoffe Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades des Fachbereichs Chemie der Universität Hamburg Vorgelegt von Fernando Ibarra aus Hamburg Hamburg 2002 Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. W. Francke Prof. Dr. W. A. König II Die vorliegende Arbeit wurde in der Zeit vom März 1998 bis Dezember 2001 unter der Betreuung von Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. W. Francke am Institut für Organische Chemie der Universität Hamburg durchgeführt. Meinem Doktorvater, Herrn Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Wittko Francke danke ich für die Überlassung des interessanten Themas und für die organisatorische Freiheit, die er mir bei der Gestaltung dieser Arbeit ließ. Auch für die Ermöglichung der vielen Forschungsreisen, die entscheidend zum Erfolg dieser interdisziplinären Arbeit beigetragen haben, möchte ich mich an dieser Stelle herzlich bei ihm bedanken. III Para Jana y Nahuel por la fuerza y alegría que siempre me regalaron. IV 1 Einleitung 1 2 Themenübersicht 6 2.1 Intra- und interspezifische Kommunikation bei Hymenopteren 6 2.2 Attraktivität von Blütenduftstoffen für Insekten 7 3 Interaktionen zwischen Blütenpflanzen und deren Bestäubern 8 3.1 Sexualmimikry in der Orchideengattung Ophrys 9 3.1.1 Ophrys speculum - Campsoscolia ciliata 12 3.1.2 Ophrys sphegodes - Ophrys fusca - Ophrys bilunulata 27 3.1.3 Ophrys panattensis - Osmia rufa 31 3.1.4 Ophrys bertolonii - Chalicodoma sicula 35 3.2 Sexualmimikry bei australischen Orchideen der Gattung Chiloglottis 38 3.2.1 Chiloglottis
    [Show full text]
  • Species List
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • AUSTRALIAN ORCHID NAME INDEX (27/4/2006) by Mark A. Clements
    AUSTRALIAN ORCHID NAME INDEX (27/4/2006) by Mark A. Clements and David L. Jones Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research/Australian National Herbarium GPO Box 1600 Canberra ACT 2601 Australia Corresponding author: [email protected] INTRODUCTION The Australian Orchid Name Index (AONI) provides the currently accepted scientific names, together with their synonyms, of all Australian orchids including those in external territories. The appropriate scientific name for each orchid taxon is based on data published in the scientific or historical literature, and/or from study of the relevant type specimens or illustrations and study of taxa as herbarium specimens, in the field or in the living state. Structure of the index: Genera and species are listed alphabetically. Accepted names for taxa are in bold, followed by the author(s), place and date of publication, details of the type(s), including where it is held and assessment of its status. The institution(s) where type specimen(s) are housed are recorded using the international codes for Herbaria (Appendix 1) as listed in Holmgren et al’s Index Herbariorum (1981) continuously updated, see [http://sciweb.nybg.org/science2/IndexHerbariorum.asp]. Citation of authors follows Brummit & Powell (1992) Authors of Plant Names; for book abbreviations, the standard is Taxonomic Literature, 2nd edn. (Stafleu & Cowan 1976-88; supplements, 1992-2000); and periodicals are abbreviated according to B-P-H/S (Bridson, 1992) [http://www.ipni.org/index.html]. Synonyms are provided with relevant information on place of publication and details of the type(s). They are indented and listed in chronological order under the accepted taxon name.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened Flora Posters 2002:Threatened Flora Posters 2002 18/3/09 1:23 PM Page 5
    Threatened Flora Posters 2002:Threatened Flora Posters 2002 18/3/09 1:23 PM Page 5 Late hammer orchid Endangered Flora of Western Australia If you think you have seen this plant, please call the Department of Conservation and Land Management’s Blackwood District on (08) 9752-1677 or Albany District on (08) 9842-4500. Drakaea is a small genus of nine species, endemic to southwest Western Australia. Collectively, they are known as hammer orchids because of the mechanism by which they achieve pollination. All have a hinged labellum (lip) that is similar in appearance to a wingless female Thynnid wasp and emits a sexual pheromone that exactly matches that emitted by the wasp. Attracted by the pheromone, the male wasp latches onto the decoy and attempts to fly away with it but, because of the hinged nature of the labellum, is flicked over against the column either removing or depositing pollen. D. confluens (late hammer orchid) was first recognised as being distinct by E. Chapman who discovered it growing in bushland on his farm near Boyup Brook. Further collections of the species were later made from near Mondurup Peak in the Stirling Range National Park. Although late hammer orchid often grows with other hammer orchids, including the more common Drakaea livida and D. glyptodon , it begins flowering as they are finishing hence its common name. The orchid is readily distinguished from both these species by its two-coloured labellum that has a straight, rather than upturned, apex. The scientific name ‘confluens’ is derived from the Latin confluens (confluent, running together), alluding to the labellum which has features of both Drakaea livida (e.g.
    [Show full text]