Effects of variation in inflorescence size and floral rewards on the visitation rates of traplining pollinators ofAralia hispida

By James D. Thomson. Evolutionary Ecology, 2005

135 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

How do floral display size and the density of surrounding flowers influence the likelihood of bumble bee revisitation to a plant (2007, background): “Williams and Thomson (1998) were the first to find by marking individual bumble bees that pollinators visiting a single plant contained both regular (frequent) and occasional (infrequent) visitors.”
The influence of Mimulus ringens floral display size on pollinator visitation patterns (2004, background): “Our findings support Thomson & Chittka (2001) in their call for researchers to quantify both intra- and inter-”
Consistent mixing of near and distant resources in foraging bouts by the solitary mason bee Osmia lignaria (2003, background): “Thus, these females may be forced to balance the efficiency of both pollen and nectar collection (Tepedino and Parker, 1982; Thomson, 1988).”
POLLINATION SUCCESS IN A DECEPTIVE ORCHID IS ENHANCED BY CO-OCCURRING REWARDING MAGNET PLANTS (2003, methodology): “To establish the frequency with which queen bumblebees actually accept or reject orchid inflorescences encountered along their foraging routes, we used the ‘‘bee interview technique’’ (Thomson 1988, Johnson and Nilsson 1999).”