Paul J. Johnson wrote: >There are numerous studies that show various levels of relationship >between euglossines and orchids and other flowers. There is little >data to indicate any obligate relationship on a one-on-one basis >between any bee species and any orchid species. Such relationships are >speculative and based on extremely limited observation.
.. I think in response to a post of mine some days ago. First, thank you. Second, it seems that one cannot believe what one hears on television - astonishing. It seemed too pat a story line to be credible, whatever one made of the biology. I do wonder about one thing. Over and over one hears that pollinators are not obligate: that anything that buzzs can ring an orchids bell, size allowing. How then has the hyperspecialisation of the orchid flower arisen? The clear thought, for me at least, is that insects share a common system of perception and imprinting - more or less - and that what rings bells for one does so for others. The point of floral distinctiveness - as opposed to showiness, bee-fashion, which simply increases what a shopkeeper would call 'foot fall' and is served by being big, gaudy in the ultraviolet and smelly - is to imprint the insect on this particular morphology, so that it will carry pollen(-inia) to another of the same make. Instant brand loyalty amongst six-legged consumers. If this is to work across genera, then the genera must have the same pattern recognition tool kit. Interesting... _____________________________________ Oliver Sparrow Tel: UK (0)20 7736 9716 www.chforum.org www.treknepal.org www.trekperu.org www.datafreeze.com _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [email protected] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
