Are food-deceptive orchid species really functionally specialized for pollinators?

Food-deceptive orchid species have traditionally been considered pollination specialized to bees or butterflies. However, it is unclear to which concept of specialization this assumption is related; if to that of phenotypic specialization or of functional specialization. The main aim of this work was to verify if pollinators of five widespread food-deceptive orchid species (Anacamptis morio (L.) R.M. Bateman, Pridgeon & M.W. Chase, Anacamptis pyramidalis (L.) Rich., Himantoglossum adriaticum H. Baumann, Orchis purpurea Huds. and Orchis simia Lam.) predicted from the phenotypic point of view matched with the observed ones. We addressed the question by defining target orchids phenotypic specialization on the basis of their floral traits, and we compared the expected guilds of pollinators with the observed ones. Target orchid pollinators were collected by conducting a meta-analysis of the available literature and adding unpublished field observations, carried out in temperate dry grasslands in NE Italy. Pollinator species were subsequently grouped into guilds and differences in the guild spectra among orchid species grouped according to their phenotype were tested. In contradiction to expectations derived from the phenotypic point of view, food-deceptive orchid species were found to be highly functionally generalized for pollinators, and no differences in the pollinator guild spectra could be revealed among orchid groups. Our results may lead to reconsider food-deceptive orchid pollination ecology by revaluating the traditional equation orchid-pollination specialization

Pollination biology of Luisia curtisii (Orchidaceae): indications of a deceptive system operated by beetles

A population of Luisia curtisii (Orchidaceae: Aeridinae) in northern Thailand was studied with regard to pollination biology. Although a high level of self-compatibility was demonstrated experimentally, the very low natural fruit set (1.4-1.9 %) clearly indicated that the species depends on external agents for pollination. Our observations suggest that L. curtisii is pollinated by beetles, as Lema unicolor (Chrysomelidae) and Clinteria ducalis (Scarabaeidae) were the only flower visitors observed to carry pollinaria of this species. The hypothesis of specialised cantharophily is further supported by 2-methylbutyric acid and caproic acid being striking components of the floral scent. Judging from the lack of nectar and the behaviour of visiting beetles, the pollination system seems to rely on food or brood site deception. Retention of the anther on the pollinarium for some time after pollinarium removal probably reduces the frequency of insect-mediated autogamy and geitonogamy in Luisia curtisii-a possibility that was supported by comparative data on (1) the anther retention time and inflorescence visitation time of Lema unicolor and (2) stigma and anther length in the orchid. Existing reports of specialised beetle pollination in orchids are reviewed, and we conclude that there is accumulating evidence that specialised cantharophily is more common in the Orchidaceae than previously assumed