tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-54298922554017111272024-03-06T12:02:52.986-08:00Natural MusingsEric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.comBlogger98125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-28032146856389130652017-06-09T11:01:00.002-07:002017-06-09T11:01:21.376-07:00Growing sand-verbenas (Abronia/Tripterocalyx)For awhile, I've been working on plant defense and other aspects of the ecology of the sand-verbenas (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-1696/full" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://www.ericflopresti.com/abronia.html" target="_blank">here</a>). Despite being much-beloved coastal and desert wildflowers, <i>Abronia</i> species have a (slightly deserved) reputation for being hard to germinate, hard to keep alive, and just generally not that great plants. Thus, they are uncommon in gardens of even the most diehard native plant folks.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LPEI9djKFcA/WTrTaVjNn9I/AAAAAAAAD-U/q3HlrPah62Aq-Qwo1OS_oaV_UqQMmGhAwCLcB/s1600/IMG_0941.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LPEI9djKFcA/WTrTaVjNn9I/AAAAAAAAD-U/q3HlrPah62Aq-Qwo1OS_oaV_UqQMmGhAwCLcB/s640/IMG_0941.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia villosa</i>, Imperial Dunes, 3/2017. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
For the past two years, I've been growing them in the lab, greenhouse, and home garden and refining my protocols for growing them. I haven't taken a really scientific approach to this - I haven't done huge numbers of replicates or really controlled environments, but I've tried out a number of approaches, talked to lots of more knowledgeable folks, and tried quite a number of species with success.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8Nzzsu5KYOMiqNw5VD4uLedczX8-cypw0qSp2DAedZHJ0AnRyunPnDtks8QzNaq13qRHe0rmGWDiCdCnLF2CwToMaXXKpPM-oWB0v2yPJcNQ-db3Y3abgnBw2xhvt3KIOmNBff_c8mK_d/s1600/IMG_3159.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8Nzzsu5KYOMiqNw5VD4uLedczX8-cypw0qSp2DAedZHJ0AnRyunPnDtks8QzNaq13qRHe0rmGWDiCdCnLF2CwToMaXXKpPM-oWB0v2yPJcNQ-db3Y3abgnBw2xhvt3KIOmNBff_c8mK_d/s640/IMG_3159.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia maritima</i>, the easiest species to clone and perhaps the easiest to grow in captivity. Morro Bay, 4/2016. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The keys to success are actually quite simple - (1) they need sand, (2) they need space, (3) if you want flowers, they need fertilizer.<br />
<br />
(1) Most sand-verbenas are restricted to very sandy areas - coastal dunes, desert dunes, desert washes, etc. so its definitely no surprise they need sand. For bigger plants, I use ~75% play sand - the cheapest at ACE - and ~25% potting soil (I've been using Sunmix with good success). I've tried 50/50 and some species (such as <i>fragrans</i>), do like this, but the sandier coastal and desert ones seem to like more sand. Sand is really well-draining, so you needn't worry about overwatering, but it does lose its moisture really fast, especially if the plant is too large for the pot, so keep an eye on them. I water every 3-4 days in the lab and greenhouse. <br />
<br />
For seedlings, I use closer to 50/50 and keep them covered to retain moisture. They dry out very quickly and it takes them awhile to really get going (much longer than most of your garden plants).<br />
<br />
I tried transplanting some into the clay soils of Davis. Unsurprisingly, they all died very quickly. I bet you could do them in turface, cactus mix or perlite or maybe even coarse vermiculite, but sand is proven and it is so cheap and easy, I don't feel much need to change that.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BkLHbo-SM2Q/WTrWP-8wlxI/AAAAAAAAD-o/q1YZfIOYXtYMxPN0r8aG4m_-dLAW-yv4wCLcB/s1600/IMG_0201.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BkLHbo-SM2Q/WTrWP-8wlxI/AAAAAAAAD-o/q1YZfIOYXtYMxPN0r8aG4m_-dLAW-yv4wCLcB/s640/IMG_0201.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia pogonantha</i> in the lab. You can see the flowerbuds just starting on this one. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
(2) Keep them in <u><b>big </b></u>pots. This is really important - <i>Abronia</i> usually have really extensive root systems to find whatever little nutrients and water are in their sandy environments. The picture below demonstrates this very clearly.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nHPtixfHZZM/WTrXWJCXs0I/AAAAAAAAD-w/h5953ju_niQHYwtrgRg_0iemucwdXS2TwCLcB/s1600/IMG_1301.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1067" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nHPtixfHZZM/WTrXWJCXs0I/AAAAAAAAD-w/h5953ju_niQHYwtrgRg_0iemucwdXS2TwCLcB/s640/IMG_1301.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The root system of <i>Abronia latifolia </i>in a blown-out dune at Doran Beach, Sonoma, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The desert species - <i>villosa, pogonantha, turbinata</i> - can get away with being in small pots - but if so, do use the really deep ones. However, since they are all sprawling, prostrate groundcover, they look and do best if given space above-ground, too. I transplant them to 8" or 10" pots when they have 2-4 leaves. This allows them to develop a good root system fairly quickly and seems to lead to quicker growth and flowering. On my patio at home, I have villosa and fragrans in 5 gallon buckets (with holes drilled in the bottom) and a ~10 gallon planter. Both of these have ~75/25 sand and work well (and buckets are cheap and easy).<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tJFsJY7oRIc/WTraPOu03DI/AAAAAAAAD-8/k3XvhxCTBQ8wV2t6YWDpS5eweON-7YnVQCLcB/s1600/IMG_1370.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tJFsJY7oRIc/WTraPOu03DI/AAAAAAAAD-8/k3XvhxCTBQ8wV2t6YWDpS5eweON-7YnVQCLcB/s640/IMG_1370.JPG" width="480" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia ameliae</i> in a 4" pot. This plant desperately needs transplanting. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
(3) Fertilize constantly. Sand (and the nonnutritive potting soil I generally use) is pretty much nutrient-free. This seems to not matter much for vegetative growth, but for most of the species, I get flowers only when I fertilize often (1/week or more!). The annual species seem to flower with a bit less pushing, but the maritime species, especially umbellata and maritima, need to be given a little push. With regular fertilization, warm temperatures and longer days (15 hours or so), they will flower constantly - I have <i>fragrans, umbellata</i>, and <i>villosa</i> that have flowered for over a year without stopping.<br />
<div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QGbmPLCgB8g/WTrbW6VvanI/AAAAAAAAD_E/9UONeiCCYZExKIRfFaPfx2XeqYqsVmxOwCLcB/s1600/IMG_0193.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QGbmPLCgB8g/WTrbW6VvanI/AAAAAAAAD_E/9UONeiCCYZExKIRfFaPfx2XeqYqsVmxOwCLcB/s640/IMG_0193.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The long-lived and long-flowering <i>umbellata </i>individual. Cloned from field-collected tissue in SLO county. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Germination. I'd written a post before on germination, but I won't even link to it, as my germination protocol has gotten much better. Here's how I do it now. You'll need ethephon (I use Monterey Florel Brand Growth Regulator, available online or at Home Depot) and some sterile media - I use vermiculite, but paper towels work, too and tupperware or a petri dish. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-O0UHxY8lrQo/WTrcTdbCj6I/AAAAAAAAD_Q/ZO7y12CHglUAb8Ejq0P6sLX_Vj-wLWiTwCLcB/s1600/IMG_0284.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-O0UHxY8lrQo/WTrcTdbCj6I/AAAAAAAAD_Q/ZO7y12CHglUAb8Ejq0P6sLX_Vj-wLWiTwCLcB/s640/IMG_0284.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Papery fruit (=anthocarps) of <i>Abronia latifolia</i>. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
(1) Remove seeds from the papery fruit. Note that many of the fruit may be empty or have inviable seeds. I'm not sure what causes this, but its likely pollination failure.<br />
<br />
(2) Mix a solution of ethephon. For the Monterey hormone, I use .66mL per 1L of water (distilled is preferred).<br />
<br />
(3) Place seeds on vermiculite or wet paper towel in your container, moisten heavily (but don't wet - there shouldn't be standing water) with your mixture. Leave for a few days in a cool dark place. If you get lucky, it will look like this after a couple days. Leave them for a day or two more, until you see the roots starting to get fuzzy and elongating (>1 cm, at least).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XYKpmztgl4w/WTrdfms9CCI/AAAAAAAAD_U/amvM92H_nAQKUhrZ7tUWF_YQxl2IzcWbwCLcB/s1600/IMG_0271.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XYKpmztgl4w/WTrdfms9CCI/AAAAAAAAD_U/amvM92H_nAQKUhrZ7tUWF_YQxl2IzcWbwCLcB/s640/IMG_0271.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Germinating <i>Tripterocalyx micrantha</i> seeds. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
(4) Transplant into a 50/50 sand/sterile soil mixture, well-moistened (but not wet), which is covered to keep the humidity up. They will grow painfully slowly. But, eventually they will get a hold on life and put on a few leaves. At that point, transplant to a larger pot and bear in mind the tips above.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yGsl7sGYmKk/WTrePrak5fI/AAAAAAAAD_Y/78Q322sLVMMNHR6WsOFZtnD8cFvB8OxaACLcB/s1600/IMG_1372.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yGsl7sGYmKk/WTrePrak5fI/AAAAAAAAD_Y/78Q322sLVMMNHR6WsOFZtnD8cFvB8OxaACLcB/s640/IMG_1372.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Seedlings (of hybrid <i>turbinata</i> x <i>pogonantha</i>). Notice that they have one seed leaf - these are derived dicots, not monocots as it might be tempting to assume!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Growing from cuttings.<br />
<br />
I've had alright success with cloning plants and some folks at the botanical conservatory here are doing a little more systematic attempt at figuring out how to clone them. I was using low-strength rooting hormone (1%), cutting below a node, and putting them in sand/perlite. I was getting low success, but importantly, not no success. <i>A. maritima</i> and <i>fragrans</i> were the species most amenable to this - I've had mixed luck with others (<i>turbinata/umbellata/ breviflora</i>) and complete failure with <i>latifolia </i>and <i>villosa</i>. The successful ones took a really long time to root - 4-6 weeks - but once rooted were quite happy and as easy to care for as others.<br />
<br />
Hopefully I'll have an update on this soon.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q5te6lL8duQ/WTrg5vGm0bI/AAAAAAAAD_g/Mlznn8SiUFUauTzpjYurUjjBXoMa5wpuQCLcB/s1600/IMG_0833.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q5te6lL8duQ/WTrg5vGm0bI/AAAAAAAAD_g/Mlznn8SiUFUauTzpjYurUjjBXoMa5wpuQCLcB/s640/IMG_0833.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>A. umbellata umbellata</i> (left) and <i>A. latifolia</i> (right). Morro Bay, 5/2017.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
Other various tips:<br />
<br />
I cage my plants with chicken wire to keep them somewhat contained. Tillett (1967) says that he trained his up poles in a greenhouse. I've had no luck with this, but the chicken wire cages work pretty well. I either route the stems coming out back in, or just trim them off. This seems to work well to conserve space.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lTjG9xdq9Mw/WTrfEvQuSYI/AAAAAAAAD_c/q9V_BXOA2toXL0FCFH0dGEPkRRl7fGv2wCLcB/s1600/IMG_1358.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lTjG9xdq9Mw/WTrfEvQuSYI/AAAAAAAAD_c/q9V_BXOA2toXL0FCFH0dGEPkRRl7fGv2wCLcB/s640/IMG_1358.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From left to right: <i>A. umbellata breviflora</i> (pink), maritima (behind, upright, no flowers), <i>Tripterocalyx micrantha</i> (in front, drooping), <i>latifolia</i> (behind, dark green leaves),<i> turbinata</i> (white flowers), <i>umbellata umbellata </i>(purple, far right)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Crossing is pretty easy. Since most species (<i>A. u. breviflora</i>, all <i>Tripterocalyx</i> spp., and <i>A. ammophila</i> excepted) are self-incompatible, you don't generally need to emasculate. Find out where the stigma comes up in the tube, and cut the flower between that and the lowest anther, open up the tub so the stigma is exposed, and pollinate! I've had good luck with intra- and inter-specific crosses.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q6WmwLfs8wE/WTrhxUoa8sI/AAAAAAAAD_k/6bOxGwyhfLUGMFT5ifuVAkQDMeoQY_WXQCLcB/s1600/IMG_1238.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="480" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q6WmwLfs8wE/WTrhxUoa8sI/AAAAAAAAD_k/6bOxGwyhfLUGMFT5ifuVAkQDMeoQY_WXQCLcB/s640/IMG_1238.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hybrid <i>pogonantha </i>x <i>maritima</i>. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
If you have any comments or questions, do let me know! I'd be really excited to help folks out who want to try them. </div>
</div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-61902347825973057522016-12-24T13:09:00.002-08:002016-12-24T13:09:35.051-08:00Data I'll never publish II: Salinity and herbivoryI spent a lot of my second year of grad school thinking about salinity and insect herbivory. Generally, insects don't like very much salt (i.e. how many marine insects have you seen?). Salt is a fairly effective herbivore deterrent - an observation seemingly first made in 1980 by D. Newbery in an <i>Oecologia</i> paper on mangrove herbivory. I made the same observation, and tested it experimentally, in chenopods in a 2014 paper (also in <i>Oecologia</i> - they've seemingly cornered the salinity/insect herbivory market).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m08-M9ZIy3A/WF7SlBh3eCI/AAAAAAAADhc/9kKgzo2j8eQ705pXAC1jF5bvE0ycO3VzgCLcB/s1600/IMG_6687.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m08-M9ZIy3A/WF7SlBh3eCI/AAAAAAAADhc/9kKgzo2j8eQ705pXAC1jF5bvE0ycO3VzgCLcB/s640/IMG_6687.JPG" width="425" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Coconut palms might be the most widespread and useful (to human) halophytic plant. They were useful for that hammock, at least. Abaco Island, Bahamas, 2011. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />Plants are also affected by salt and have myriad ways to deal with it, basically all variations on either excluding it, sequestering it, or excreting it. Obviously some plants are much better at dealing with salt than others (see mangroves, <i>Zostera</i>, etc.) - we call plants that are adapted to saline environments "halophytes" (i.e. salt plant in Greek). I happened upon a little, weedy, nonnative, and pretty much unremarkable chenopod - <i>Oxybasis glauca</i> - growing at the edge of a building in Davis and somehow I decided it was a pretty cool plant. Given all the other cool halophytes available, I'm not sure why I chose this plant to do a bunch of experiments on, but I did.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PUi2q74TgSQ/WF7TSwRCkYI/AAAAAAAADhg/PUh-J5igmswSiDJxkaH4NZrvvivFtpjbACLcB/s1600/IMG_0681.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="424" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PUi2q74TgSQ/WF7TSwRCkYI/AAAAAAAADhg/PUh-J5igmswSiDJxkaH4NZrvvivFtpjbACLcB/s640/IMG_0681.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is<i> Oxybasis glauca</i> growing in volcanic sand on the edge of Mono Lake, Mono, CA. I was with a group of about 30 people when I found this and was very excited. I couldn't really even articulate a single cool thing about the plant - it is salt tolerant, but every plant in that area is salt tolerant. Maybe the coolest thing is that <i>Oxybasis</i> species have really small seeds compared to <i>Chenopodium</i> or <i>Atriplex</i>... maybe there is nothing special about it?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Like most <i>Atriplex </i>and <i>Chenopodium</i> (the genus which <i>Oxybasis</i> was split from) species, <i>Oxybasis glauca</i> has salt bladders - little bubble like trichomes which the plant shunts salt to and then they burst, an odd but effective form of salt excretion. This leaves a layer of salt on the outside of the plant. This protects the plant from herbivory somewhat.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mMGn9XofsoY/WF7VHLLYAaI/AAAAAAAADh0/jOY2kVGU_Qw-uBLyOBbpUexotKrPAeO9gCLcB/s1600/0657.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="265" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mMGn9XofsoY/WF7VHLLYAaI/AAAAAAAADh0/jOY2kVGU_Qw-uBLyOBbpUexotKrPAeO9gCLcB/s400/0657.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3USDl3pY6fg/WF7VHBlnX7I/AAAAAAAADhw/ycSpvS7TtNwgztpAgeXhzdJ5MNgPPVMjwCLcB/s1600/0651.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="265" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3USDl3pY6fg/WF7VHBlnX7I/AAAAAAAADhw/ycSpvS7TtNwgztpAgeXhzdJ5MNgPPVMjwCLcB/s400/0651.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pre- (above) and post- (below) bladder burst <i>O. glauca </i>leaves (lab-grown). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /><div>
Because <i>O. glauca</i> is salinity-tolerant and the primary herbivore of most weedy chenopods in the valley, the spotted cucumber beetle (<i>Diabrotica undecimpunctata</i>), doesn't like salt (see my 2014 paper), I wondered if there might be a refuge from herbivory effect at higher salinities and maybe there would be an intermediate salinity where the plant would still grow well, but herbivores would be deterred. So I did an experiment - I grew plants in three salinities* and then exposed half of them to a week* of cucumber beetle herbivory. I expected herbivore pressure would be most intense at low salinities, but also growth would be retarded at higher salinities. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So the hypothesis looks something like this - if plant "performance" is on the y-axis and the green line is effect of herbivory and grey the effect with solely salinity, if there is some overlap, the plant might do best at that overlap point (or it might not). (note: this is not a particularly good graphical representation for a number of reasons). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-F1DkZFlK1Xs/WF7eT3QZKFI/AAAAAAAADiE/xkVHCiP2bSQeayLodTd-fPiL0xNUT8nQgCLcB/s1600/slainity.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-F1DkZFlK1Xs/WF7eT3QZKFI/AAAAAAAADiE/xkVHCiP2bSQeayLodTd-fPiL0xNUT8nQgCLcB/s320/slainity.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
What did I find?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Plant response to salinity (w/o herbivores):</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D4CH-ZdcOeU/WF7hzp5yfgI/AAAAAAAADic/Bp7UQLWxCKYDCFftgtwYRdCOFBF0NN2ewCLcB/s1600/salinity3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D4CH-ZdcOeU/WF7hzp5yfgI/AAAAAAAADic/Bp7UQLWxCKYDCFftgtwYRdCOFBF0NN2ewCLcB/s640/salinity3.png" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Salinity increasing left-right. Standard deviation plotted.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br />Plants did worse as salinity increased (as expected). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Herbivory:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Ym_K0maDzg/WF7ggj75qRI/AAAAAAAADiQ/zghOswl1WKsH6lZlv8rorkJtHOJxyj-PgCLcB/s1600/slinity2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Ym_K0maDzg/WF7ggj75qRI/AAAAAAAADiQ/zghOswl1WKsH6lZlv8rorkJtHOJxyj-PgCLcB/s640/slinity2.png" width="618" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Salinities increasing in treatments 1-4. Standard deviation plotted.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Total leaves damaged by the herbivores decreased with increasing salinity (as expected, as they are less palatable), but because the plants had fewer leaves, the proportion damaged increased. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
THE INTERACTION</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-834lucnOOi4/WF7i3l26IPI/AAAAAAAADik/jL1ilj4DuLsgWW0fNkKPPqGck6I12dP7gCLcB/s1600/salinity%2B4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-834lucnOOi4/WF7i3l26IPI/AAAAAAAADik/jL1ilj4DuLsgWW0fNkKPPqGck6I12dP7gCLcB/s640/salinity%2B4.png" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Biomass of plants. Dark green: with herbivores, light green: without herbivores. Salinity increasing left to right. Standard deviation plotted. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sadly, there wasn't. Beetles didn't really have an effect on biomass (or any other metric). Maybe I didn't have them in there for long enough? Maybe they really don't have a fitness effect (I can certainly believe this). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Maybe this data will be useful to someone. Email me for the sheets. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
*Note: the exact procedures are in one of about 40 notebooks in my office, so I don't actually know exactly the salinities or number of days right now. If anyone is interested for any reason, I can easily dig this up. </div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-49555183375568156722016-09-26T21:51:00.002-07:002016-09-26T21:51:43.987-07:00Musings on pollinators and sticky plantsHaving spent much of the last four years seeking out sticky plants, I'll admit to mostly having thought about their herbivores and general insect communities on the plant surfaces, without too much thought to pollination. A labmate's question about columbine (<i>Aquilegia eximia</i>) pollination - "Do they have any adaptations to prevent bees?" got me thinking about this. <i>A. eximia</i> is hummingbird-pollinated and is extremely sticky (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-0342.1/abstract" target="_blank">see here</a>). I've spent enough time looking at, and photographing, over a hundred species of sticky plants that I was able to dredge up some pertinent observations (some from field notebooks) and I'll reference a few papers that have mentioned this.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RcB9HyIGu_4/V-inWVV-PbI/AAAAAAAADT8/UnVozaSpAJQNur51IoxeGO0QAVGhmwcDwCLcB/s1600/honeybee.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RcB9HyIGu_4/V-inWVV-PbI/AAAAAAAADT8/UnVozaSpAJQNur51IoxeGO0QAVGhmwcDwCLcB/s640/honeybee.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A honeybee entrapped on the sticky flower/pedicel of serpentine columbine (Ranunculaceae: <i>Aquilegia eximia</i>). Note the robbing hole present on the front (out of focus) and left spur. These were made by carpenter bees (<i>Xylocopa californica</i>). Honeybees and other bees visit as secondary robbers, though they do not regularly visit unrobbed flowers. The primary pollinator of <i>A. eximia</i> here is Anna's Hummingbird (<i>Calypte anna</i>). McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The general explanation for sticky plants is that it prevents herbivory directly (by slowing or entrapping herbivores). This is generally an insufficient explanation, as pointed out by Tom Eisner and colleagues (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC22502/" target="_blank">here</a>) who found that ladybugs were slowed or entrapped, allowing a specialist aphid to feed on <i>Mentzelia pumila</i> (Loasaceae - a painful plant family). Eisner's explanation, however, also seems simplistic and incomplete - it turns out that a suite of specialist predators are good at moving on sticky plants and do effectively prevent herbivory (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/08-0267.1/full" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12032/full" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-0342.1/abstract" target="_blank">here</a>, more coming!). Whether these are exceptions or the rule, I suspect this defense is fairly common. While I think Eisner et al. missed the boat on trophic relations in <i>Mentzelia</i> (this is not a completely baseless accusation; I have some data to back my case up), they do make an astute observation on a cost of being sticky: "among the insects we found dead on <i>M. pumila</i> there were several individuals of an andrenid bee, <i>Perdita</i> sp., ... a genus known to include pollinators of <i>Mentzelia. </i>Evidently the trichomes can be a hazard to [pollinators]<i> </i>".<br />
<br />
People have long thought about adaptations both for a specific pollinator <i>and against others that are not as effective</i>. Is stickiness a problem for pollination or could it be a benefit in some cases?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZcwYcJoNHoKRtOPvq3jVdleVW1kbIztOBCQWHpn5DiodV2JohlVkOcUKeFc6jkDKwT31XFYGxxDaDxp-lR9vkgTRVr1UzAb-DXnmW-x4aAaRzfpTOJqCCU05SxdgDGKMyW-Wl6rb0hXbs/s1600/lycaenid_micrantha.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><i><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZcwYcJoNHoKRtOPvq3jVdleVW1kbIztOBCQWHpn5DiodV2JohlVkOcUKeFc6jkDKwT31XFYGxxDaDxp-lR9vkgTRVr1UzAb-DXnmW-x4aAaRzfpTOJqCCU05SxdgDGKMyW-Wl6rb0hXbs/s640/lycaenid_micrantha.jpg" width="518" /></i></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Entrapped Lycaenid butterfly (I think it is <i>Plebejus acmon</i>) on <i>Mentzelia micrantha</i>. It seems likely this butterfly was entrapped while visiting a flower, as it is entrapped on a flowerhead (it is on a bract surrounding a fruit, but it probably had been there since there was a flower). Napa County, CA.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
First, we should ask: do sticky plants actually entrap their pollinators commonly? Unlike the smaller-flowered <i>Mentzelia</i> (like <i>micrantha</i> pictured above), which are likely self-pollinating, the larger-flowered species, including Eisner's <i>pumila</i> (and the widespread and stunning <i>laevicaulis</i>) have large flowers separated from the very sticky (like velcro) leaves. Carnivorous plants, including the sticky sundews, often have widely separated flowers and traps. Yet, a nice study by Jurgens et al (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2435.12408/abstract" target="_blank">here</a>) found that the separation in one sundew is simply because taller flowers attract more pollinators (and the sundew's sticky leaves remain near the ground). They found that the color differences between the flower and trap were more important in keeping pollinators on the flower and off the leaves. Complementing this, a more recent study showed that color is important, but odor might also be important, especially in sundew species without much physical separation (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4757879/" target="_blank">here</a>). A strange paper (see footnote) on a South American aster showed practically no overlap between pollinators and entrapped insects (<a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11829-014-9328-x" target="_blank">here</a>). The sticky columbines - <i>eximia, shockleyi</i>, and some populations of <i>formosa</i> - are all hummingbird-pollinated, as is the sticky monkeyflower, <i>Mimulus cardinalis</i>; the chance a hummingbird becomes entrapped is virtually zero. <br />
<br />
The first thing to note is that none of these papers have actually examined whether there is a pollination cost to being sticky. Of course, a past cost may shape evolution, but not be obvious now. While these examples make the case for putative adaptations to not entrap pollinators, none except El-Sayed's paper have any sort of comparative aspect. Therefore, we can't be sure that these are actually adaptations. This isn't to belittle the research, of course, as the experimental studies are very nice and convincing that these factors underly the non-trapping of pollinators. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iSK4VNSBl4c/V-i00NT1f2I/AAAAAAAADUc/9sEEPZMp1xIU3bEf_X3bph5StCYQPWQ_QCLcB/s1600/solitary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iSK4VNSBl4c/V-i00NT1f2I/AAAAAAAADUc/9sEEPZMp1xIU3bEf_X3bph5StCYQPWQ_QCLcB/s640/solitary.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A small bee of some sort entrapped on a serpentine columbine bud. Two <i>Tupiocoris californicus</i>, one of the mutualistic predators, are pictured on the right of the bud. McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
I wonder, if perhaps in addition to these chemical and visual cues keeping pollinators away, if another way to avoid entrapping pollinators is to utilize pollinators which are too large to be entrapped? Could it then be used to exclude suboptimal pollinators? Might stickiness might be easier to evolve in plants with larger pollinators or sticky plants be selected on to have larger pollinators? This chicken-or-egg situation need not be resolved; it would be interesting enough to find out whether there is a correlation. One could go about testing this by looking at insect-entrapping plants and comparing them to their close relatives and asking (quantitatively), is the pollinator of this sticky plant larger than expected given the pollinators of its closest relatives? Our paper on columbines includes a genus-level list of insect entrapping plants, this would be a good place to start when looking for possible comparisons (at whatever level you choose, you'd need to have both sticky and non-sticky members of each taxa). Off the top of my head -<i> Aquilegia, Mimulus, Salvia, Calceolaria, Ribes, Nicotiana</i> seem like genera with both sticky and nonsticky members and pollinator variation and would be a good place to start (surely I am missing some).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G-55DY-GQ28/V-nNEGavTNI/AAAAAAAADUw/NYO16NVSBP4FC-BScF08r-90qs94Eoq-QCLcB/s1600/bolanderi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G-55DY-GQ28/V-nNEGavTNI/AAAAAAAADUw/NYO16NVSBP4FC-BScF08r-90qs94Eoq-QCLcB/s640/bolanderi.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A small solitary bee (I'm not good on bee genera) on <i>Mimulus bolanderi</i>. Among <i>Mimulus</i> that I've investigated, <i>bolanderi </i>entraps the most insects. There is little information on this strange, fire-following species, and I have only seen one pollinator visit (this one!), but I was mostly looking for predators. Another insect-entrapping <i>Mimulus</i> is hummingbird-pollinated (<i>cardinalis</i>). Some populations of common monkeyflower (<i>M. guttatus</i>) are sticky, others are not - all are bumblebee pollinated, I believe.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In conclusion:<br />
<br />
1) Sticky plants occasionally entrap potential pollinators, though we don't know yet whether there is a realized cost to this, indeed it could be a benefit and may keep less-effective pollinators away.<br />
<br />
2) Several experiments have demonstrated that features of some sticky plants prevent pollinators from being entrapped.<br />
<br />
3) I hypothesize that sticky plants may have larger pollinators, as it would reduce chance of a cost (but I am agnostic about which might evolve first) and might even have a benefit (as an adaptation to exclude some pollinators).<br />
<br />
I'd love other people's thoughts or other references (I haven't really dipped my toes into the literature on keeping less effective pollinators out of flowers).<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Footnote:</u></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">I hope this group follows up on this system, as cool questions could be asked, but this paper is confusing (and if they read this post, they should read Patricia Thomas's 1988 dissertation at U. Illinois, which looks at a similar system in a thistle - I have a pdf). They looked at <i>Haplopappus</i> flowers, which have sticky bracts (like <i>Grindelia</i> and some <i>Cirsium</i>) and recorded flower visitors and entrapped insects to see whether there was overlap. This, in and of itself, is a good exercise. However, the paper is lacking in much pertinent information and clear discussion of what they found, What stuck out to me most was that</span><span style="font-size: x-small;"> they found that the tephritid fruit fly, <i>Dioxyna chilensis</i>, (which is an herbivore of this plant) was a common flower visitor and commonly entrapped, </span><span style="font-size: x-small;">thus the stickiness may be a direct defense. Somehow this and really any herbivory isn't mentioned - despite "herbivores" being mentioned in the title - herbivores weren't really discussed in the paper. </span><span style="font-size: x-small;">Also, they discuss pollinators, but not really any functional explanations of why some insects might end up on bracts and others on flowers (for instance, they found ants and a family of beetles were the most commonly entrapped insects - yet they don't discuss that both primarily walk, whereas the non-entrapped taxa fly). Their conclusions are technically right, but rather incomplete: "Thus, comparing all arthropod genera found, it seems that bracteal resin selectively traps insect genera with lesser pollen transfer potential." Hopefully more work will come out, as it seems Villagra's lab is working more on the system. </span>Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-24713560518979284232016-08-29T21:53:00.000-07:002016-08-29T21:53:39.469-07:00An unexpected herbivore<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Columbines are toxic! Like larkspurs, columbines are supposedly toxic to most livestock and humans. So say the books. This rabbit doesn't listen to the books. (The internet, in its infinite wisdom, says that the eastern species has edible - to human - flowers, so maybe the rabbit is just rather tech-savvy)</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dz-MUOuIjpzG4o98bL44wTpW_wdjAES6i9SKgZK6Cf28yCINP4ogZgUpt7SLWKknbJGGV9i8jm0Y3o4sRGoaw' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
I actually suspect that the roots and leaves may be somewhat toxic but the reproductive parts, including the flowers and pedicels (which the same rabbit eats in the next video!), are not. Deer also eat them, especially in one particular population, which I've mostly stopped using for experiments because of it. Wild speculation aside, just thought I'd share the video as I got a kick out of it.<br />
<br />
Also, a question - is this a brush rabbit (<i>Sylvilagus bachmani</i>), a European rabbit (<i>Oryctolagus cuniculus</i>) or a black-tailed jackrabbit (<i>Lepus californicus</i>)? . A terrible still of the tail from the video is below. I feel a bit silly that I can't even conclusively get it to genus. I'd be kicking myself pretty seriously if I couldn't get a dragonfly, bird, wildflowers, or butterfly to genus and really this should be far easier!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hBOqSWzVLuM/V8UO8hvU42I/AAAAAAAADNc/Wr-jf3Pj55oKqSgqgxwbNarSeKX9TCMOQCLcB/s1600/rabbit1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="460" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hBOqSWzVLuM/V8UO8hvU42I/AAAAAAAADNc/Wr-jf3Pj55oKqSgqgxwbNarSeKX9TCMOQCLcB/s640/rabbit1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-27618301433274650742016-08-12T16:28:00.002-07:002016-08-12T16:28:58.280-07:00Another sticky columbine with dead bugs and predators!A few weeks back, Rick Karban and I headed to the east side of the Sierras and the White Mountains to look for some <i>Abronia</i> and <i>Nicotiana</i> species for continuing projects. I also took a wish list of species (with herbarium GPS coordinates) that seemed worth checking out. We were able to easily find <i>Abronia nana</i> (not really sand-catching), <i>Abronia turbinata</i> (somewhat sand-catching), <i>Nicotiana attenuata</i> (bug-catching), and <i>Alliciella monoensis </i>(sand-catching). I also had a record of <i>Aquilegia shockleyi</i>, the desert columbine. After spending so many hours over a few years looking at <i>eximia</i> (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-0342.1/abstract" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2015/07/sticky-plant-attraction-new-paper.html" target="_blank">here</a>), I've spent more time looking at other columbines. The sierra species, <i>formosa</i>, is fairly boring from an insect-plant perspective, being nonsticky, largely devoid of predatory bugs and often covered in aphids.<br /><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yUOqZukHHmg/V65PMWFnOuI/AAAAAAAADKM/_ODn2i5Ft-obPnAX4wSHp91GtU6luWmbgCLcB/s1600/IMG_7207.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yUOqZukHHmg/V65PMWFnOuI/AAAAAAAADKM/_ODn2i5Ft-obPnAX4wSHp91GtU6luWmbgCLcB/s640/IMG_7207.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This <i>Aquilegia formosa</i> was growing along Mormon Emigrant Trail (El Dorado county), seen on the way to the east side. Compared to my <i>eximia</i>, it has tiny flowers (probably 2/3 the size of <i>eximia</i>). With only anecdotal evidence to support this, I suspect that this is because Calliope Hummingbirds, the smallest one around, are a common visitor (though others are, too) and would be unlikely to successfully access the nectar in a much bigger flower. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cIijaLoKJsw/V65Qwz-HvyI/AAAAAAAADKY/55m8HOycITQC6VpC5CY-Wyq20jJRfYGCwCLcB/s1600/IMG_7204.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cIijaLoKJsw/V65Qwz-HvyI/AAAAAAAADKY/55m8HOycITQC6VpC5CY-Wyq20jJRfYGCwCLcB/s640/IMG_7204.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Aphid exuviae on a bud of <i>A. formosa</i>.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The Jepson said that <i>shockleyi</i> hybridizes with <i>formosa</i> in desert mountains, so I was expecting it to be fairly similar - nonsticky and not that interesting from my plant-insect perspective. Fortunately, I was wrong.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SMrD5u9Bfy4/V65TcH0rIlI/AAAAAAAADKk/bduHyYa2QgkZQFQEAE1jnsFTjoah7bfvACLcB/s1600/IMG_7621.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SMrD5u9Bfy4/V65TcH0rIlI/AAAAAAAADKk/bduHyYa2QgkZQFQEAE1jnsFTjoah7bfvACLcB/s640/IMG_7621.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Aquilegia shockleyi</i>, White Mountains, CA.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In a really pretty little desert oasis, we found a nice population of <i>shockleyi</i> growing in a flowing spring with my favorite thistle, <i>Cirsium douglasii</i>, an associate of <i>A. eximia</i> at my field site. This species is every bit as sticky as <i>eximia</i>, every stem had dozens to hundreds of entrapped insects.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NAfQHH6FCr4/V65UZrZ2mBI/AAAAAAAADKs/y9WyXzTAS2wRQQzYugyTGR4HnjVQAKUZgCLcB/s1600/IMG_7636.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NAfQHH6FCr4/V65UZrZ2mBI/AAAAAAAADKs/y9WyXzTAS2wRQQzYugyTGR4HnjVQAKUZgCLcB/s640/IMG_7636.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A typical <i>shockleyi</i> stem - dead beetles, flies, wasps - tasty morsels for the right predator!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Vn0FMCDDvIs/V65WLOw4ClI/AAAAAAAADK8/lkuIDx0CuWIuMkGbRo64di-EKBQNMj_aQCLcB/s1600/IMG_7686.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Vn0FMCDDvIs/V65WLOw4ClI/AAAAAAAADK8/lkuIDx0CuWIuMkGbRo64di-EKBQNMj_aQCLcB/s640/IMG_7686.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Another, for good measure.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Of course, my first thought was - is a carrion-mediated defense system happening in this species, too? That requires that there are scavenging predators and herbivores that the predators can eat (often they eat just the herbivore eggs). Sure enough, in just a few stems, I quickly found both.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The herbivore was, predictably, <i>Heliothis phloxiphaga</i> - a really common and destructive caterpillar that is common on most glandular plants in California and is multivoltine (has several generations per year). It is extremely bad for plants as, unlike many caterpillars, it largely eschews leaves in favor of buds, flowers and fruit (it is part of the aptly named group, the budworms). This is the same species that eats <i>eximia</i> and is controlled by the sticky plant predators at McLaughlin, where they consume its eggs and small caterpillars. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kdgFJvcpsrE/V65VL0nUAgI/AAAAAAAADKw/qW2XxyY_6goKxr5XOINfXr4ImgmZkQnOwCLcB/s1600/IMG_7736.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kdgFJvcpsrE/V65VL0nUAgI/AAAAAAAADKw/qW2XxyY_6goKxr5XOINfXr4ImgmZkQnOwCLcB/s640/IMG_7736.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A late-instar caterpillar on <i>shockleyi</i>. They have no trouble at all moving on the sticky stems of any plant, though I don't know exactly how they do it.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-v9r5x0eEsgc/V65XBx8TUWI/AAAAAAAADLE/G6PLxFf_cf4AcE38BFkFOSJGBb3pMLy6wCLcB/s1600/IMG_7800.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-v9r5x0eEsgc/V65XBx8TUWI/AAAAAAAADLE/G6PLxFf_cf4AcE38BFkFOSJGBb3pMLy6wCLcB/s640/IMG_7800.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Typical <i>Heliothis </i>damage to a <i>shockleyi</i> fruit. It has consumed 3 of the carpels (the seed pods) completely and consumed all the immature seeds from the two remaining ones seen in the picture.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Predators were present as well. They were not in abundance, but were around. The most common was Hoplinus eschinatus - usually the most common on eximia, as well as tarweeds, sticky Mimulus, sticky tobaccos, etc. They are great egg predators and are just great insects in general. I got only crummy pictures that are not worth sharing here. The other interesting predator present was <i>Oecantha</i> - tree crickets. I only saw two really tiny nymphs (pictured below), but they are also on eximia in low numbers. Unlike most Orthoptera (the grasshopper/cricket/katydid order), they are really omnivorous, feeding on dead insects, live insects, as well as the plant in small quantities. On tarweeds, especially <i>Madia</i>, where they are common, they have benefits and costs the plants - they are predators and remove some herbivores, but they also chew leaves and oviposit into the stem, leaving big scars. I've never seen these scars or any evidence of them chewing on columbines (which are notoriously toxic to many animals), so I suspect that is less of a problem, but I really don't know. I've only seen them three or four times in three years of working on eximia, so I'd bet they are too rare to really have a huge impact<i> </i>- and these two were the only which I saw on <i>shockleyi</i>. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-56lUww6D5rw/V65Ym6HX2MI/AAAAAAAADLU/3t-4Y_UmV-MsBjL5jijSPdU79s6v8jMPACLcB/s1600/IMG_7628.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-56lUww6D5rw/V65Ym6HX2MI/AAAAAAAADLU/3t-4Y_UmV-MsBjL5jijSPdU79s6v8jMPACLcB/s640/IMG_7628.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Two tree cricket nymphs. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
There was one interesting contrast to the eximia system. A seed bug of some sort (I didn't collect it) was present and feeding on the seeds. I've noticed occasional clutches of eggs on <i>eximia</i>, but the nymphs either disperse or perish in the stickiness; I've never seen one actively feeding. This bug moved with seeming ease and was common. I'd bet that <i>Hoplinus</i> and other sticky plant predators would be effective at controlling it; the egg masses are present on the plant and the nymphs likely stick around on the same plant (somewhat important for the carrion-provisioning system to work). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hgDghGfuUaw/V65Z5l-c5EI/AAAAAAAADLk/3iWOC1EJnG49PQU6LmhJ9KgKTRQRkWpPQCLcB/s1600/IMG_7751.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hgDghGfuUaw/V65Z5l-c5EI/AAAAAAAADLk/3iWOC1EJnG49PQU6LmhJ9KgKTRQRkWpPQCLcB/s640/IMG_7751.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Unknown bug feeding on <i>shockleyi </i>seeds in a ripe fruit.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KrxSqk38YzY/V65Z5pgUKVI/AAAAAAAADLg/2s9scoDcRCw0DKedFL-Gn_WEtEeAqCh0QCLcB/s1600/IMG_7767.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KrxSqk38YzY/V65Z5pgUKVI/AAAAAAAADLg/2s9scoDcRCw0DKedFL-Gn_WEtEeAqCh0QCLcB/s640/IMG_7767.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Just hatched nymphs of the unknown bug on a ripe <i>shockleyi </i>fruit.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In conclusion, this was a really cool plant, and it is a strong, strong, candidate for the carrion-provisioning system which I described in eximia. Someone should study it. A simple carrion-removal experiment, checked weekly through the growing season would be an easy project (for an undergrad, perhaps?) and would give us new insights (how do these sticky plant predators control seed bugs?) and would be really fun. There is nothing as much fun as being in a wet place in the desert or coast range, with hummingbirds visiting the columbines around you and other birds, mammals and insects abundant in the little watery oasis. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lTu3uG9PLkQ/V65WtYMcaPI/AAAAAAAADLA/9s0e7LohphgbdLNIec5-xO83o30ZmyDvACLcB/s1600/IMG_7796.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lTu3uG9PLkQ/V65WtYMcaPI/AAAAAAAADLA/9s0e7LohphgbdLNIec5-xO83o30ZmyDvACLcB/s640/IMG_7796.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Another picture of dead stuff on <i>shockleyi </i>stems. Please study it.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-30700547856231182462016-07-02T11:03:00.003-07:002016-07-02T11:03:36.063-07:00A natural history idea for ecologists: the natural history supplementAt risk of rehashing what is in this very short paper (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.1239/epdf" target="_blank">open access pdf here</a>), a few colleagues and I have a simple idea for how to encourage natural history in current ecology and evolution. A whole bunch of notable folks, including Harry Greene, Josh Tewksbury, Paul Dayton and more have noted the decline in traditional natural history - the taking of observations, collecting specimens, and classes in zoology and botany - among academics over the last half decade or so. Their papers all deserve a read as they point out very real problems and quantify these declines.<br />
<br />
Though these papers draw attention to the issue and make a very convincing case that it is an issue, they don't offer realistic solutions. I'll not overstate our case; our small idea won't bring back botany classes where they once were taught or inspire people to create an insect collection at a college without one. However, we have an idea that may incentivize natural history study, at least a small bit. We propose that ecologists and evolutionary biologists create a <a href="https://40619833-524042698838204968.preview.editmysite.com/uploads/4/0/6/1/40619833/lopresti_and_karban_2016_nat_hist_supp.pdf" target="_blank">natural history supplement</a> with their paper to highlight potentially interesting observations and important natural history data.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pRIajOzfdhw/V3FifflGPkI/AAAAAAAADFM/yDPo7jXInCQYhis9Pgrzpp4b6OKQ6Yo_gCLcB/s1600/pogo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="454" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pRIajOzfdhw/V3FifflGPkI/AAAAAAAADFM/yDPo7jXInCQYhis9Pgrzpp4b6OKQ6Yo_gCLcB/s640/pogo.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">An example of character displacement? A somewhat disjunct population of <i>Abronia pogonantha</i> in the coast range (left) is deep pink-purple, where populations I've looked at in the Mojave which grow near <i>Abronia villosa</i> (a deep pink purple species) are whitish or very light pink (right). I'm not going to investigate it, but I'll include it in a natural history supplement so someone else might and I took specimens of these plants and sent them to an herbarium. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Anything of potential interest could go into this supplement (though it should not be used as support for the main assertions of a paper - any natural history of that sort still belongs IN the paper). This needn't only apply to field studies, either - researchers working in greenhouses or in laboratories with colonies of microorganisms make important natural history observations, too - they are just as intimately familiar with their study systems as a field biologist.<br />
<br />
We think that there are a few reasons why this small addition would be particularly important and useful. First and most obviously, these observations WILL be useful to someone down the line, somewhere, sometime. Even if it takes 50 years for someone to investigate a particular plant or insect, these observations of behavior, population size, flowering time, etc. in 2016 are an invaluable snapshot of what you saw when. Richard Primack and co.'s wonderful reanalysis of flowering time data which Thoreau gathered in the 1800's are a perfect example of this type of use. Secondly, meta-analyses and comparative studies are commonplace and particularly informative and could use those life history data included in these supplement that wouldn't make it into a paper on another aspect, but are likely data that many folks take instinctively.<br />
<br />
Since we have the internet, archiving these sorts of things has never been easier. Many papers have a great deal of supplementary information (especially in short-form journals) and publishers have ways to archive it. While it doesn't need to be done immediately, if this practice is adopted, a database of these natural history supplements could be compiled at any time.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iVU6U0wmdr8/V3Fk1N6BwyI/AAAAAAAADFY/SdmzOqOUR1kAn63D_oDK_wXKzTEXmsgoACLcB/s1600/IMG_4631.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iVU6U0wmdr8/V3Fk1N6BwyI/AAAAAAAADFY/SdmzOqOUR1kAn63D_oDK_wXKzTEXmsgoACLcB/s640/IMG_4631.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This caterpillar, <i>Sympisits </i>[<i style="font-size: 12.8px;">Lepipolys</i><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">] </span><i style="font-size: 12.8px;">perscripta</i><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">, is having a good year on both </span><i style="font-size: 12.8px;">Antirrhinum vexillo-calyculatum </i><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">(pictured) and </span><i style="font-size: 12.8px;">A. cornutum</i><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">. However, it is far more abundant on </span><i style="font-size: 12.8px;">v-c</i><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">. even when </span><i style="font-size: 12.8px;">cornutum</i><span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> is the more abundant food. I'll likely never write a paper on snapdragons, but if I did, this would be a perfect type of observation for the natural history supplement. </span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Lastly, it incentivizes natural history observations and data. The "currency", if you will, of academia is papers and citations. While including a natural history appendix doesn't boost the first aspect, if the additional information in that supplement is of use to others, it can only boost your citation count and make your work more widely read.<br />
<br />
If those sound like good or bad arguments, read the full paper (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.1239/epdf" target="_blank">again, here</a>), there is a good bit more in it. I'll conclude by saying that I've written two of these, both for papers in Ecology (<a href="https://40619833-524042698838204968.preview.editmysite.com/uploads/4/0/6/1/40619833/lopresti_and_karban_2016_nat_hist_supp.pdf" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="https://40619833-524042698838204968.preview.editmysite.com/uploads/4/0/6/1/40619833/lopresti_et_al_2015_nat_hist_supp.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>) and they have been easy and enjoyable to write. Has anyone actually read them? I'm not sure (do tell if you have!). Maybe not, but that doesn't seem particularly troubling to me - even if one person reads them and gets inspiration for a study or uses some data in an analysis decades after I'm gone, I'll be happy. Plus, they were more fun to write than the main text of these papers. I focused both of these by describing briefly a great deal of natural history, hoping that someone studying one of these systems (especially the well-known ones, like <i>Mimulus</i> or <i>Petunia</i> or <i>Nicotiana</i>) would think about insect- or sand-entrapment.<br />
<br />
On another level completely, I'm sure <i>Ecology</i> wouldn't have let me use the fantastic quote “[<i>Pholisma</i> feels like] a squishy gummy bear covered in fuzzy sand covered hairs” in the main article :) .<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-E04_Kl4jcsg/V3Fm4i2Bk9I/AAAAAAAADFk/rp4NHtFMdA8-B0BTa5TID1x9rUwMAA27gCLcB/s1600/jwick.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-E04_Kl4jcsg/V3Fm4i2Bk9I/AAAAAAAADFk/rp4NHtFMdA8-B0BTa5TID1x9rUwMAA27gCLcB/s640/jwick.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This stilt bug, <i>Jalysus wickhami</i>, moves easily on the sticky surfaces of many plants, including this weird, sticky fire-following monkeyflower, <i>Mimulus bolanderi</i>, by grabbing the glandular trichomes below their sticky heads. However, when I perturbed it for this photo, it got a bit of the sticky stuff on its front legs (visible in photo) and was visibly disoriented and had to groom it off with its other legs. Some cool papers have focused on movement on sticky plants, so the trichome grabbing behavior is well-known, but I might still include this in a supplement (with proper citations to those papers, of course). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-687679390343224102016-05-05T11:02:00.000-07:002016-05-05T11:02:49.355-07:00Variation in phenotype (mutants!)Obviously, variation in traits is present in all populations and all species, but its quite easy to forget that - a mallard looks like a mallard, right? Evolution acts upon this variation, be it timing of flowering, anti-predator behavior or body size, constantly. I find variation in "characteristic" traits very interesting (and by "characteristic", I mean how a naturalist would recognize a species, for instance in plants this might be color, growth form, leaf shape, etc.). I've been noting these for quite awhile and keeping a photo log - mostly of flower color, which is especially interesting to me - here's a selection.<br />
<br />
This isn't meant as a real ecology post, just an appreciation for the natural world, but do bear in mind the little tidbits of science thrown in - they'll only make it more interesting. As Huxley famously said, "To the person uninstructed in natural history, his country or sea-side stroll is a walk through a gallery filled with wonderful works of art, nine-tenths of which have their faces turned to the wall."<br />
<br />
I'll mostly put a "normal" picture first and then the mutant. Here's a normal <i>Mimulus guttatus</i>, the common yellow monkeyflower - a widespread, common and lovely species.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QXqV5_ytnho/Vyt6dvbC3uI/AAAAAAAAC-Y/NKW4QqZLlZMlWvBLupMcd9AYXav_E5FxACLcB/s1600/IMG_3776.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QXqV5_ytnho/Vyt6dvbC3uI/AAAAAAAAC-Y/NKW4QqZLlZMlWvBLupMcd9AYXav_E5FxACLcB/s640/IMG_3776.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;">
And a weird red mutant:</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TMaaRMoEGBY/Vyt7E_SY9iI/AAAAAAAAC-g/wMLhleWm_B0opuzjC2zQ1lpv022JAld2gCLcB/s1600/IMG_3781.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TMaaRMoEGBY/Vyt7E_SY9iI/AAAAAAAAC-g/wMLhleWm_B0opuzjC2zQ1lpv022JAld2gCLcB/s640/IMG_3781.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA<br /></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
A normal <i>Tritelia laxa</i>.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q_2wvuNUx4M/Vyt7ZMN4fHI/AAAAAAAAC-k/1eN6QwkWPdA-YhihUf_gFKsvB02GASwSQCLcB/s1600/IMG_3663.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="425" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q_2wvuNUx4M/Vyt7ZMN4fHI/AAAAAAAAC-k/1eN6QwkWPdA-YhihUf_gFKsvB02GASwSQCLcB/s640/IMG_3663.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px;">Berryessa-Knoxville Rd., Napa County, CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And a white one:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tCv5IqGIxqw/Vyt8EmUa6LI/AAAAAAAAC-s/NKziKZxdVN4bITsNh_PXc6NmrVDr9uoxQCLcB/s1600/IMG_3672.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tCv5IqGIxqw/Vyt8EmUa6LI/AAAAAAAAC-s/NKziKZxdVN4bITsNh_PXc6NmrVDr9uoxQCLcB/s640/IMG_3672.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Berryessa-Knoxville Rd., Napa County, CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
A normal blue-eyed "grass" (really an iris), <i>Sisyrinchium bellum</i>:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b1YcuTwcoSs/Vyt8kTJRN2I/AAAAAAAAC-8/jnXz5m6bs2Ia1Cn0TW4d19KDWI2R-chhwCLcB/s1600/IMG_3691.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b1YcuTwcoSs/Vyt8kTJRN2I/AAAAAAAAC-8/jnXz5m6bs2Ia1Cn0TW4d19KDWI2R-chhwCLcB/s640/IMG_3691.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
and a white one:<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ujFkOTGneT0/Vyt8kNQ59yI/AAAAAAAAC-4/FXCZF5B6T3g1jXY5B6-Pw8ealyEAw0fAACLcB/s1600/IMG_3694.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ujFkOTGneT0/Vyt8kNQ59yI/AAAAAAAAC-4/FXCZF5B6T3g1jXY5B6-Pw8ealyEAw0fAACLcB/s640/IMG_3694.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Normal <i>Mimulus nudatus</i>, a cool serpentine endemic in the northern coast range.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-izgRWTHZV0s/Vyt9N-FtBvI/AAAAAAAAC_I/Ee61_d9fh9gLn05pv8s1zqBoWvmyxm9iwCLcB/s1600/IMG_2176.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-izgRWTHZV0s/Vyt9N-FtBvI/AAAAAAAAC_I/Ee61_d9fh9gLn05pv8s1zqBoWvmyxm9iwCLcB/s640/IMG_2176.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And a weird beige morph:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OcGPR7oVBek/Vyt9MnluSiI/AAAAAAAAC_E/bWX_oQ5r11EnbkdoFPAPuXPHL7UpaL4UACLcB/s1600/IMG_2180.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OcGPR7oVBek/Vyt9MnluSiI/AAAAAAAAC_E/bWX_oQ5r11EnbkdoFPAPuXPHL7UpaL4UACLcB/s640/IMG_2180.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And both normal and white morphs of <i>Collinsia sparsiflora</i>:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hQV9tOpws2g/Vyt-KSZLNUI/AAAAAAAAC_Y/i7AcMqPhM2MqA8cefYD13_Iw3kOG-Bq6wCLcB/s1600/IMG_2205.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hQV9tOpws2g/Vyt-KSZLNUI/AAAAAAAAC_Y/i7AcMqPhM2MqA8cefYD13_Iw3kOG-Bq6wCLcB/s640/IMG_2205.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">McLaughlin Reserve, Napa County, CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Normal and white morphs of <i>Mimulus layneae</i>. Interestingly, the two white individuals in this population had flatter flowers as well.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fIt2-ErARoc/Vyt-tuM0IVI/AAAAAAAAC_c/Qr8BOqSipJIZgIK8BR4z5tsbmC16-IOzwCLcB/s1600/IMG_3640.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fIt2-ErARoc/Vyt-tuM0IVI/AAAAAAAAC_c/Qr8BOqSipJIZgIK8BR4z5tsbmC16-IOzwCLcB/s640/IMG_3640.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Why are white flowers so common in plants? Purple or reddish colors are caused by a group of chemicals called anthocyanins. These are synthesized in a pretty complex pathway that involves a bunch of steps, all mediated by proteins. If a mutation (or developmental issue), interrupts the function of any of these steps, you get a loss of function, which in this case becomes a white flower.<br />
<br />
In some species, there is simply a polymorphism - its not rare to have differently-colored flowers (or -colored seed, or -shaped fruit, etc.). This <i>Leptosiphon</i> sp. has both pink and white flowers in roughly equal proportions in a population I looked at.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8vUHcRedzco/Vyt_mKUY8vI/AAAAAAAAC_s/X6_-kLiaUTchDjw0fUgau6moOeoNOVYewCLcB/s1600/IMG_2067.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8vUHcRedzco/Vyt_mKUY8vI/AAAAAAAAC_s/X6_-kLiaUTchDjw0fUgau6moOeoNOVYewCLcB/s640/IMG_2067.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Like Leptosiphon, many other members of the Polemoniaceae have white/colored polymorphisms within populations. Navarretia mellita (often a sandy plant!), is one:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QdnLnDwaCEU/VyuELVe8dVI/AAAAAAAAC_4/I02MrbFVah4CZq6AwLz0pUiumVGXE-ZrQCLcB/s1600/IMG_0267.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QdnLnDwaCEU/VyuELVe8dVI/AAAAAAAAC_4/I02MrbFVah4CZq6AwLz0pUiumVGXE-ZrQCLcB/s640/IMG_0267.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jDV6-xNRXkk/VyuELTYoD3I/AAAAAAAAC_8/ziEhS44Ah6YibKS_ueXVzP0exkcWCex0QCLcB/s1600/IMG_0269.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jDV6-xNRXkk/VyuELTYoD3I/AAAAAAAAC_8/ziEhS44Ah6YibKS_ueXVzP0exkcWCex0QCLcB/s640/IMG_0269.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Of course, color polymorphisms aren't restricted to flowers, or even plants. A cool hypothesis to explain the existance of color polymorphisms in many species of raptors is that it is harder for prey to figure out what is a predator if they all look different. To the best of my knowledge, that hypothesis is still up for debate, but its clever and seems logical. Here is a pair of Variable Hawks, <i>Buteo polyosoma</i>:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Nm9QcRYpfcE/VyuFAY3kQeI/AAAAAAAADAE/bSFbhcThP_AuBp5JlDieBPxlwLkrSiRJgCLcB/s1600/IMG_8159.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Nm9QcRYpfcE/VyuFAY3kQeI/AAAAAAAADAE/bSFbhcThP_AuBp5JlDieBPxlwLkrSiRJgCLcB/s640/IMG_8159.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Bosque del Pomac, Lambayeque, Peru</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
And another morph, of the same species!</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8dbAtNdoMX0/VyuFgsxD_bI/AAAAAAAADAI/MhCINiV3bVo38vA1KD_SH2phPyjdiJZ8QCLcB/s1600/IMG_8210.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8dbAtNdoMX0/VyuFgsxD_bI/AAAAAAAADAI/MhCINiV3bVo38vA1KD_SH2phPyjdiJZ8QCLcB/s640/IMG_8210.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A juvenile, I think. Bosque del Pomac, Lambayeque, Peru</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I don't know any hypotheses for the maintenance of color polymorphisms in caterpillars, but some have them. <i>Hyles lineata</i> feeding on <i>Abronia villosa</i>:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xhgSKBt17qg/VyuGcVB-3eI/AAAAAAAADAY/NOiodsTtuHQ6B0tX9OaPKFWVxemaMT98wCLcB/s1600/IMG_0908.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xhgSKBt17qg/VyuGcVB-3eI/AAAAAAAADAY/NOiodsTtuHQ6B0tX9OaPKFWVxemaMT98wCLcB/s640/IMG_0908.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">San Diego Co., CA</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8Vcjj4TZPPk/VyuGcQy5JfI/AAAAAAAADAc/c0-nSUeQJQYwEpqVP30Wm-YynzWaV36ggCLcB/s1600/IMG_0917.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8Vcjj4TZPPk/VyuGcQy5JfI/AAAAAAAADAc/c0-nSUeQJQYwEpqVP30Wm-YynzWaV36ggCLcB/s640/IMG_0917.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12.8px;">San Diego Co., CA</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-89354123373225441522016-04-25T16:26:00.004-07:002016-04-25T16:26:58.178-07:00Sandy plants: a paper, an update, some wacky plant photos.A little while back, I <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-1696/full" target="_blank">published a paper</a> that Rick and I had been working on for awhile. In short, there are quite a number of plants which entrap substrate - sand, dirt, etc. - on their surfaces with sticky trichomes. These species occur worldwide in dunes, beaches and deserts. Quite a number of people, dating back to the late 1800's, had hypothesized that this "sand armor" must protect the plant, but nobody had actually gone out and tested it. So we tested both the hypothesis that it is physically defensive (who wants to chew on sand?) and that it is a form of camouflage (since of course, it makes the plant look like the background).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OsNzhMxT1sQ/Vx6VOBY2kxI/AAAAAAAAC6k/vwV1_DK4GgAwUp3GNVMvN2grbAalFZXQgCLcB/s1600/IMG_3411.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OsNzhMxT1sQ/Vx6VOBY2kxI/AAAAAAAAC6k/vwV1_DK4GgAwUp3GNVMvN2grbAalFZXQgCLcB/s640/IMG_3411.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia pogonantha</i>, one of the sandiest plants I've seen. Photo: EL.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
We found support for the physical defense hypothesis (in two tests) and did not find any evidence that the camouflage protects the plant. You can read (<a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/inkfish/2016/03/04/plants-build-sand-armor-to-fight-hungry-animals/#.Vx6VtPkrLcu" target="_blank">Inkfish - one of the best science blogs</a>) or hear (<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/quirks-quarks-for-mar-12-2016-1.3487387/plants-glue-on-sand-for-armour-1.3487431" target="_blank">Quirks and Quarks</a>) more about this project. <br />
<br />
The best part of publishing this was hearing from a prominent researcher (who had noticed this phenomenon), that he tells his students: "if you don't believe that sand is defensive for the plant - try sandpaper instead of toilet paper!" Since publishing this, I've been able to continue this research and observe quite a few more cool sandy plants - some of which were new to me and some of which I had only heard of.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-c2iYwGl9BPU/Vx6WTQyrX2I/AAAAAAAAC6s/dVkEi4zNazQwhQl3rDcZRFhhRaRP02Y2gCLcB/s1600/IMG_3017.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-c2iYwGl9BPU/Vx6WTQyrX2I/AAAAAAAAC6s/dVkEi4zNazQwhQl3rDcZRFhhRaRP02Y2gCLcB/s640/IMG_3017.JPG" width="426" /></a><br /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The best sandy plant in the world. The common names for <i>Pholisma arenarium</i> include "scaly-stemmed sand plant", which is my personal favorite plant name ever. About an inch tall. Near Morro Bay, CA. Photo: EL</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In that paper, there is a list of sand-entrapping plants. Many of these I had seen and noticed. Others were from published literature. I surveyed a bunch of really good naturalists and they suggested many others (their list was the longest). That is how I happened upon <i>Pholisma</i>, pictured above. This odd plant is a borage (the family includes some wellish-known plants including borage, heliotrope, fiddleneck, baby blue eyes, phacelia, etc.). Looking like a lump - maybe a mushroom? - it is completely chlorophyll-free, instead sucking nutrients from nearby plants (it is an obligate parasite, like Indian pipe, <i>Monotropa,</i> in the east). And the coolest part, of course, is how much sand it catches - it is nearly completely covered! It is very possible that plants which coat themselves in sand suffer a photosynthetic cost because less light reaches them. For <i>Pholisma</i>, that doesn't matter at all!<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qsxgSFv42SQ/Vx6YayjyCKI/AAAAAAAAC64/JodgebSZ6WwCiDVvMLpZWH5KExonnim0ACLcB/s1600/IMG_3112.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qsxgSFv42SQ/Vx6YayjyCKI/AAAAAAAAC64/JodgebSZ6WwCiDVvMLpZWH5KExonnim0ACLcB/s640/IMG_3112.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">LOOK AT ALL THAT SAND! (I am pretty sure those purple things are flower buds - I didn't unfortunately get to see a flowering individual).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i>Pholisma</i> was, since I learned about it last year, the top of my list of must-see plants and seeing it was one of my spring highlights so far. I happened upon it accidentally while looking at another sand-entrapping plant, <i>Abronia umbellata</i> (I used <i>Abronia latifolia</i> in my experiments).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-agcJYMsOwXM/Vx6ZqhKwJEI/AAAAAAAAC7I/MraxYRGKxaULBjw1I7Q5mcufotakUY7zwCLcB/s1600/IMG_2925.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-agcJYMsOwXM/Vx6ZqhKwJEI/AAAAAAAAC7I/MraxYRGKxaULBjw1I7Q5mcufotakUY7zwCLcB/s640/IMG_2925.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia umbellata</i> is not as sandy as some congeners, but it is pinker than most! (there is also a really, really, cool paper on floral evolution in this species - <a href="http://www.amjbot.org/content/100/11/2280.full" target="_blank">check it out</a>). Photo: EL.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The central coast of California has three species of Abronia which grow in close proximity on coastal dunes. <i>Abronia maritima</i> is generally on the beach while <i>latifolia</i> and <i>umbellata</i> are a little farther up (and occasionally grow over each other). They each catch sand to some extent.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YPofHyYJjPg/Vx6aRh2ye5I/AAAAAAAAC7Q/TmKPMkq_W7QbRse_AagbyrxcAuBP6VYmQCLcB/s1600/IMG_3158.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YPofHyYJjPg/Vx6aRh2ye5I/AAAAAAAAC7Q/TmKPMkq_W7QbRse_AagbyrxcAuBP6VYmQCLcB/s640/IMG_3158.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia maritima</i>. The yellow anthers are positioned right above the stigma and seem to drop pollen onto it (from my couple flower dissections). It has far smaller flowers than the other species. I'd bet quite a bit that it is selfing. Photo: EL. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoOvN1lbL_P7jJEB8jvoS_Tu36y8dMbb8wm67-KhGXOXWYSBusO-7D5YaeSKfj-y6EDg-pVy8Q9xYqoVZ8L7HJyNrSaZXWJBGIZZKglqXI8KSQ8WhTP60d2YGH16hmySI2pzVljMDMjgcm/s1600/IMG_3076.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoOvN1lbL_P7jJEB8jvoS_Tu36y8dMbb8wm67-KhGXOXWYSBusO-7D5YaeSKfj-y6EDg-pVy8Q9xYqoVZ8L7HJyNrSaZXWJBGIZZKglqXI8KSQ8WhTP60d2YGH16hmySI2pzVljMDMjgcm/s640/IMG_3076.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Abronia latifolia</i>, the common sand verbena for most of the California coast. Common doesn't mean boring though, its quite awesome. Photo: EL</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hs_wkAK_85o/Vx6crwP4V7I/AAAAAAAAC7o/xvercKVLZQ4C13yyH0ECyD9gDKHco6edgCLcB/s1600/IMG_3129.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hs_wkAK_85o/Vx6crwP4V7I/AAAAAAAAC7o/xvercKVLZQ4C13yyH0ECyD9gDKHco6edgCLcB/s640/IMG_3129.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">My labmate/collaborator, Patrick, found this bizarre plant. My best guess - and it was pre-fruiting, so I can't be sure - is that its an <i>umbella</i> x <i>latifolia</i> hybrid. It had leaves reminiscent of <i>latifolia</i> (large, broad, very fleshy but held upright like <i>umbellata </i>and somewhat in between the two in glandularity) and stems which were stickier than <i>umbellata</i>, but very red like <i>umbellata</i>. The flowers were too long for an abberant <i>maritima </i>(and leaf structure wrong), but seemed fine for either <i>latifolia</i> or <i>umbellata</i> (though with aberrant coloration). Jury is out. Thoughts? Photo: EL</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i>Abronia</i> are awesome (everyone knows that already) but there are some smaller, more inconspicuous plants that are also really good at sand-catching.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KJc_9LVSayc/Vx6e0Ja46oI/AAAAAAAAC70/ibvh4BB1ob8u04dtqyXs8wS3_Jf7zzNBgCLcB/s1600/IMG_1838.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KJc_9LVSayc/Vx6e0Ja46oI/AAAAAAAAC70/ibvh4BB1ob8u04dtqyXs8wS3_Jf7zzNBgCLcB/s640/IMG_1838.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is <i>Tiquilia plicata</i>. It mostly grows as a little roadside weed in the Mojave. It catches lots of sand on the margins of its leaves (!) and stems. Margins of leaves are usually where caterpillars and other chewing insects begin feeding... (hand-wavy adaptationist explanation over). Like <i>Pholisma</i>, it is also in the borage family. Photo: EL </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zDnLVSWRnTk/Vx6fcBBJycI/AAAAAAAAC78/oYRnJ0YNmlE5KAWGoathf7xS1321T6HzQCLcB/s1600/IMG_0940.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zDnLVSWRnTk/Vx6fcBBJycI/AAAAAAAAC78/oYRnJ0YNmlE5KAWGoathf7xS1321T6HzQCLcB/s640/IMG_0940.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Tiquilia</i> has nice flowers, but you have to look really hard to find them (they are tiny). This was a tall individual growing in a less-sandy spot (hence the lack of sand on the leaves and stems in the photo - the bottom still had lots). Photo: EL. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;">
Another new favorite plant was <i>Centrostegia thurberi</i>. A tiny, cherry red, spiny bizarre thing, it is mildly sticky and has bracts encircling its stems which catch lots of sand - seemingly with stickiness and also just being shaped like a bowl. This was another favorite. </div>
<br /><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hgD9bBp0sno/Vx6gKN4JcBI/AAAAAAAAC8E/y-X8dACvQGMgBFB1BjvaoIAAyeUETrlsQCLcB/s1600/IMG_3358.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hgD9bBp0sno/Vx6gKN4JcBI/AAAAAAAAC8E/y-X8dACvQGMgBFB1BjvaoIAAyeUETrlsQCLcB/s640/IMG_3358.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Centrostegia thurberi</i>. Photo: EL.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JMkzilyaEt0/Vx6gxKBVE3I/AAAAAAAAC8M/ZLfLTesBbo07c9SN6_ijEYpJw2e-7d74gCLcB/s1600/IMG_3371.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JMkzilyaEt0/Vx6gxKBVE3I/AAAAAAAAC8M/ZLfLTesBbo07c9SN6_ijEYpJw2e-7d74gCLcB/s640/IMG_3371.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It catches a lot of sand on its stems, but... (photo: EL)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-N757nHwaPdo/Vx6g4NwuezI/AAAAAAAAC8Q/pkFSVKlwnzA8jfLDE_S-3uLyJBL6LqfdACLcB/s1600/IMG_3356.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-N757nHwaPdo/Vx6g4NwuezI/AAAAAAAAC8Q/pkFSVKlwnzA8jfLDE_S-3uLyJBL6LqfdACLcB/s640/IMG_3356.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It also does this! <i>Dipsacus</i> - teasel - often has these sorts of bracts that fill with water and mosquito larvae and stuff. I've never seen bracts full of sand before (and every plant had them!). Photo: EL. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And lest I turn completely into a botanist, there were some insects, too. Importantly, there was one caterpillar - <i>Hyles lineata</i> - that was really common in a bunch of spots on <i>Abronia</i>. This species, the white-lined sphinx moth, is common over much of North America some years and absent others. Fortunately for me and unfortunately for many herbaceous plants, it is having a good year in southern California (especially near Anza Borrego).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4STE0WosH7c/Vx6kAnB0-jI/AAAAAAAAC8c/OPUO6cVpaV0BW7hgkCacwxzYC2BCX3E1wCLcB/s1600/IMG_0917.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4STE0WosH7c/Vx6kAnB0-jI/AAAAAAAAC8c/OPUO6cVpaV0BW7hgkCacwxzYC2BCX3E1wCLcB/s640/IMG_0917.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This <i>Abronia villosa </i>is not as happy as I am about this big (3"+) final-instar caterpillar. Photo: EL. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
While <i>Hyles</i> likes to eat <i>Abronia</i> (I've found them on <i>pogonantha</i>, <i>latifolia</i>, <i>umbellata</i> and <i>villosa</i> this year), they not like to eat sand at all. While it doesn't have a good mechanism for taking it off, it seems to concentrate on nonsandy plants first and then on nonsandy parts of the plant, but it always ends up eating the sandy parts of the plant eventually.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2Mo1BBlkdqY/Vx6k8EsCPZI/AAAAAAAAC8k/FCV00SEItVMUDFCiu4fshL-GRPYOFABKwCLcB/s1600/IMG_3324.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2Mo1BBlkdqY/Vx6k8EsCPZI/AAAAAAAAC8k/FCV00SEItVMUDFCiu4fshL-GRPYOFABKwCLcB/s640/IMG_3324.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A green-morph <i>H. lineata</i> on <i>pogonantha</i>. They come in lots of colors - black, green, yellow and all manner of in-betweens. They all seem to turn into identical moths. Photo: EL</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Unsurprisingly as they don't like it, sand on plants is damaging to them. A normal Hyles mandible at pupation looks like this:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ke1RNYYZkHA/Vx6mP1LGuaI/AAAAAAAAC80/JvWHfapvOdUUSE7vpXcHC9sxKbF7kpQ_ACLcB/s1600/control%2Br4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="325" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ke1RNYYZkHA/Vx6mP1LGuaI/AAAAAAAAC80/JvWHfapvOdUUSE7vpXcHC9sxKbF7kpQ_ACLcB/s400/control%2Br4.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">An SEM micrograph of the right mandible of a <i>Hyles lineata</i> fed on nonsandy <i>Abronia latifolia</i>. Those "teeth" are for grinding up the plant before it enters the body. Photo: EL</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But if they eat sandy plants, they get pretty rough:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MnXkkE5bxxc/Vx6mPzQzsDI/AAAAAAAAC8w/gw7mtDMSXZY7kSoMKa67tJDPwnlU6ZYRACKgB/s1600/sandy%2Br4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="325" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MnXkkE5bxxc/Vx6mPzQzsDI/AAAAAAAAC8w/gw7mtDMSXZY7kSoMKa67tJDPwnlU6ZYRACKgB/s400/sandy%2Br4.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Look at the "teeth" - or lack thereof - on this right mandible, from a caterpillar feeding on sandy <i>A. latifolia</i>. Photo: EL</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
That's it for today: a description of a study, some weird sandy plants, and a teaser of a future paper...Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-39841717915735389092016-04-25T13:43:00.002-07:002016-04-25T13:43:04.928-07:00The woolly bear presidential election outlook, 2016<div class="MsoNormal">
In the age of cell phones, accurate polling of the
electorate has become difficult. In a world where a disproportionate percentage
of people answering landlines for pollsters is white and over 50, we
desperately need a new method of predicting elections. As the 2016 presidential
election looms, a crack team of UC Davis innovators has a promising new source
of information, woolly bear caterpillars (<i>Platyprepia
virginalis</i>).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pSA6nptFa3k/Vx55TIO6K8I/AAAAAAAAC5Y/rGKVD1BS-981fb3Dhr2k6QqElQ4fsNJ5gCLcB/s1600/woolly1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="392" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pSA6nptFa3k/Vx55TIO6K8I/AAAAAAAAC5Y/rGKVD1BS-981fb3Dhr2k6QqElQ4fsNJ5gCLcB/s640/woolly1.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A woolly bear contemplates the madness of the 2016 election cycle while resting on its preferred host plant, a coastal lupine. Photo: Eric LoPresti</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rick Karban, a UC Davis professor of entomology, has tracked
woolly bear caterpillar abundance since the early 1980’s at Bodega Bay,
California. Each March, Karban censuses the same patches of lupine that he has
for over 30 years. The study asks a vexing question: Why are there are so many
caterpillars in some years and so few in others? Many insects, including pests cycle like this, therefore it is of keen interest to many. Dozens of papers later,
Karban, his students, and his collaborators have answered a great many
questions, including how caterpillars deal with parasites, whether population
cycles are influenced by rain, whether caterpillars enjoy eating plant hairs,
and how caterpillars avoid their predators.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The population highs and lows seem random at a first pass, a
jagged line moving up and down each year. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-E9PJ3KpQprs/Vx56GwF11NI/AAAAAAAAC5k/XgyvWWAgqkUfHHevOmmYSkyrpvIc0U9FwCLcB/s1600/1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="342" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-E9PJ3KpQprs/Vx56GwF11NI/AAAAAAAAC5k/XgyvWWAgqkUfHHevOmmYSkyrpvIc0U9FwCLcB/s640/1.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The collected data, 1983-2015, full <a href="https://karban.wordpress.com/ltreb/" target="_blank">data available here</a>. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What separates high years from low years? These motivated
researchers have found a striking pattern in this data. This data set includes
eight presidential election years, with four Democrat and four Republican victories.
Plotted with colors corresponding to the party association of the winner, the
pattern becomes obvious.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CZjbHF-8rjg/Vx56mfb6v0I/AAAAAAAAC5s/xOH_4fzRnaw1BLcHPu9ht6Pch22IKsDEwCLcB/s1600/2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="340" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CZjbHF-8rjg/Vx56mfb6v0I/AAAAAAAAC5s/xOH_4fzRnaw1BLcHPu9ht6Pch22IKsDEwCLcB/s640/2.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Red corresponds to Republican presidential victories and blue to Democrats. To reiterate: <a href="https://karban.wordpress.com/ltreb/" target="_blank">this is actual data</a>!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Woolly bears have years of high abundance when Democrats win
and low when Republicans win. The average woolly bear abundance was 0.21 (<u>+</u>
0.07 se) woolly bears per lupine in Republican years and 1.96 (<u>+</u>0.27 se)
in Democratic years. This data shows
that woolly bear abundance in March is a good predictor of presidential
victories in the general election.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is tempting to assume that woolly bears are Democrats (and
were particularly thrilled by second-term Bill Clinton), but we cannot exclude
the possibility that their abundance is a protest gesture. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Note that 2016 is not included on the preceding two graphs.
For about a year, news sources have made predictions about the primary race and
have even speculated about the general election. Given their wildly erroneous predictions
thus far for both primaries, trusting their predictions for the general
election seems ill-advised. The woolly bears, on the other hand, have a 100% accurate
prediction record over the past 30 years. In years of low abundance, a Republican
is elected, and in years of high abundance, a Democrat. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Therefore, we are pleased to announce the woolly bears’
prediction. In mid-March of this year, Karban censused the woolly bears for
their opinion on this volatile election year where no subject seems out of bounds
and the populist wings of each party have come out like no election in recent
memory. Even the woolly bears seem hesitant this year. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tz5QXQOSlww/Vx57WvAp2KI/AAAAAAAAC58/8_JsKcPHtTQsuOTqOf7wie05GWkhEu6gACLcB/s1600/3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="342" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tz5QXQOSlww/Vx57WvAp2KI/AAAAAAAAC58/8_JsKcPHtTQsuOTqOf7wie05GWkhEu6gACLcB/s640/3.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px;">Full data, including this year's census (conducted in March).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
A superficial examination suggests that 2016 will be a Republican
year – woolly bear abundance is not particularly high. However, looking a little
closer, it may not be. The number of woolly bears per lupine bush in 2016 (0.53)
is higher than the average Republican year by 152% and is 36% above the highest
Republican year ever recorded (1988). However, it is only 27% of an average Democratic
year and still only 36% of the lowest Democratic year (2008). This result is
without presidential precedent in the last 30 years. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We suspect that the Republicans have the edge. However, a
valid hypothesis would be a third-party winner, such as a right-leaning
independent (a logical placeholder in between Democrats and Republicans).
Perhaps Donald Trump will take particular interest in our data. Alternately, a
contested Republican convention could produce a fractured party and the old Republican
woolly bear average would not accurately represent the mean caterpillar
abundances seen by this new party. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The mainstream media have been shockingly inaccurate in
their predictions so far, even despite <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-stunning-bernie-sanders-win-in-michigan-means/" target="_blank">complex and supposedly accurate statistical models</a>. We need a new strategy to predict key events such as
the 2016 presidential election. Rather than trust the opinion of a few people
with a pulpit, the historically robust predictions of this population of
caterpillars may serve as a better guide.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--ZsFHBdfSHk/Vx5-Yk9-i2I/AAAAAAAAC6Q/ccLvU8CqQAkZuDpZMhcn1CZ1wUF5c4CpwCLcB/s1600/4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="502" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--ZsFHBdfSHk/Vx5-Yk9-i2I/AAAAAAAAC6Q/ccLvU8CqQAkZuDpZMhcn1CZ1wUF5c4CpwCLcB/s640/4.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A congregation of woolly bears meets on a lupine flower spike, presumably to discuss politics. Photo: Eric LoPresti</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /><a href="https://twitter.com/InsectEcology/status/500305723554033666" target="_blank">(This research has been in progress and was presented at ESA 2014)</a><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">This post was written by Eric LoPresti, Mikaela Huntzinger, Patrick Grof-Tisza, Ian Pearse, and, of course, Rick Karban (who we suspect is not fooling these infallible caterpillars with his Bernie Sanders impersonation). </span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-479gdbfM5io/Vx59czNxeQI/AAAAAAAAC6I/7zlMyh-LafgF9tPHCDtz7qmCRB4vd-w-gCLcB/s1600/Bernie%2B2016.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="174" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-479gdbfM5io/Vx59czNxeQI/AAAAAAAAC6I/7zlMyh-LafgF9tPHCDtz7qmCRB4vd-w-gCLcB/s640/Bernie%2B2016.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Rick Karban/Bernie Sanders. Who is who? Photo on left stolen from Berniesanders.com, right: Mikaela Huntzinger.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
</div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-10216385517980585422016-04-11T11:13:00.000-07:002016-04-11T11:15:00.759-07:00Data I'll never publish: Antirrhinum herbivoryInspired by <a href="https://jeffollerton.wordpress.com/2015/02/06/data-ill-never-publish-1/" target="_blank">this post</a>, I'm going to try to put the results of small (but interesting) experiments up here every once and awhile. In the summer of 2014, I spent a lot of time washing plants. I was - and still am - curious of the function(s) of plant exudates. I primarily did this with <i>Trichostema laxum </i>and <i>Atriplex rosea</i> (in <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00442-013-2827-0" target="_blank">2013</a>), but I also did it with <i>Mimulus layneae</i> and <i>Antirrhinum cornutum </i>(California snapdragon). The snapdragon gave me interesting results.<br />
<br />
(this post should also be regarded as potential project for someone else: I started it in May - there is plenty of time to get up to McLaughlin and do it again this year).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_PNZcWfS2EA/VwvcECXbegI/AAAAAAAAC2s/U_3f2-wuwiQ5W_LOFfqcCRjdgCQ-m55jw/s1600/IMG_7992.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_PNZcWfS2EA/VwvcECXbegI/AAAAAAAAC2s/U_3f2-wuwiQ5W_LOFfqcCRjdgCQ-m55jw/s640/IMG_7992.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">One of the experimental <i>A. cornutum</i>, showing leaf damage. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This snapdragon, while not as heavily glandular as <i>Trichostema </i>or that <i>Mimulus</i>, is fairly glandular-sticky, even entrapping a <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-0342.1/abstract" target="_blank">small number of minute insects</a> (see the table/supplementary material). Under the microscope, you can see the fairly dense short glandular trichomes (the longer trichomes are mostly nonglandular) on the stalk and flower bud.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NKs2yXijRF0/VwvdF5E1EhI/AAAAAAAAC20/lQ-vrqPod0w3xkWx6loAfda8LC1ZWlL_g/s1600/antirrhinum.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="424" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NKs2yXijRF0/VwvdF5E1EhI/AAAAAAAAC20/lQ-vrqPod0w3xkWx6loAfda8LC1ZWlL_g/s640/antirrhinum.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Stem of <i>A cornutum</i> with an entrapped insect.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AF1z5uS51Vw/VwvnP_iBQMI/AAAAAAAAC3g/x_-XxPBexmU6YOEMJSaivXLxBQjLtOdhQ/s1600/1106.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="424" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AF1z5uS51Vw/VwvnP_iBQMI/AAAAAAAAC3g/x_-XxPBexmU6YOEMJSaivXLxBQjLtOdhQ/s640/1106.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Flower bud showing short glandular and long nonglandular trichomes.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Wondering whether the glandular exudate is defensive, I did an experiment where I removed it with water. Most glandular exudates in CA summer annuals seem water soluble, so a spray bottle rainfall takes off much of the exudate (observationally verified <i>in situ</i> with a 20x loupe - plus whatever was in this exudate made suds on the plant!). This manipulation was my first treatment group. Of course, adding water to a plant has an effect of its own, so I also had a water control group, where I added the same amount of water below the plant's leaves, as to not wash off any exudates. Finally, I had a true control group, which received no water whatsoever. I instituted these treatments on the 30th of May and reapplied them on the 17th of June. Each time, I recorded the number of leaves, flowers, fruit, and plant height, as well as any damage. I also checked the plants, but did not reapply treatments on the 2nd and 19th of July (the last check all were senescent).<br />
<br />
During the experiment, plants suffered two main forms of herbivory. The first type, which was most common and most destructive, was that the stems were entirely clipped off. I'm nearly positive this was by jackrabbits (indicated by a single flat cut diagonally across the stem) and it usually killed the plant. The photos below shows what remained.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JFNRhNDK2Nc/Vwvgj6VmQrI/AAAAAAAAC3A/sdfp0yRe-f8iBqGlU_Jk4cbMIStY-nR9g/s1600/IMG_7987.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JFNRhNDK2Nc/Vwvgj6VmQrI/AAAAAAAAC3A/sdfp0yRe-f8iBqGlU_Jk4cbMIStY-nR9g/s640/IMG_7987.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A killed experimental <i>A. cornutum</i> plant. See it?!? Its the little stem to the bottom left of the flag. Also notice a nice healthy <i>Lessingia</i> in the background. They, too, are extremely glandular and sticky. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jcFk4n9SljY/VwvhLl-eVtI/AAAAAAAAC3I/DLuFfRN0hLQI-nB4LMEGzVU_4X3cDDZ9w/s1600/IMG_7996.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jcFk4n9SljY/VwvhLl-eVtI/AAAAAAAAC3I/DLuFfRN0hLQI-nB4LMEGzVU_4X3cDDZ9w/s640/IMG_7996.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A survivor of mammalian herbivory. If the meristem was not completely destroyed, they often came back and branched like this. Like the classic <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/1941456?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents" target="_blank">overcompensation "herbivore-plant mutualisms"</a>, the resulting plants were often bigger than the others, with more reproductive structures, but unlike this "mutualism", it was too late in the season and they had low fitness, as they could not mature these structures. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The mammalian herbivory was not random. Of the 25 plants per treatment, 11 in the control group, 13 in the rainfall simulation (exudate removal) and a whopping 20 in the water control group were eaten by mammals (this is nonlethal, lethally was 10, 12, 18). With a simple chi-squared test, we can demonstrate that this was likely nonrandom (X2 = 7.3688, df =2, p = 0.025) (for lethal, X2 = 5.5714, df=2, p = 0.062). Why were the mammals targetting the water control plants so heavily?<br />
<br />
Were they bigger and thus easier to find or just more profitable to eat? They were not significantly different in height, fruit or flower numbers from the other two groups during any check. I don't have data on plant quality (perhaps the less water-limited plants were more nutritious or something?).<br />
<br />
The other type of damage was equally-interesting. <i>Heliothis phloxiphaga</i> is a generalist caterpillar on glandular plants. It was the primary herbivore on my columbines, as well as a common herbivore on <i>Trichostema laxum</i> and other sticky plants. Like most heliothiine noctuids, it feeds primarily (but not exclusively) on reproductive structures. I only observed it once on <i>Antirrhinum</i> (eating a fruit), but all the fruit damage I found was consistent with it (and that's one more time than I saw a jackrabbit eat it!).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0rjc8U-r0PU/Vwvk67kVXmI/AAAAAAAAC3U/YLPqLrTp54gwFsCSylpzOR6NBRRcSm5xg/s1600/IMG_9093.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0rjc8U-r0PU/Vwvk67kVXmI/AAAAAAAAC3U/YLPqLrTp54gwFsCSylpzOR6NBRRcSm5xg/s640/IMG_9093.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The other type of damage: caterpillar fruit predation. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I had hypothesized, that if the exudate were defensive, the washed plants would be most heavily eaten. This hypothesis was supported with the fruit damage. Rainfall plants received far more damage than the other groups. (note: I didn't actually analyze this with zero-inflated binomial, as it should be. There is a problem, in that only 7/25 of the water control plants had any fruit at all because of the rabbits.)<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DSM9I7TjAB0/Vwvnz0Tu-ZI/AAAAAAAAC3k/W0ULRL4YFn0ewzBSuAF1B_i-daFR_IHrw/s1600/antirrhinum.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DSM9I7TjAB0/Vwvnz0Tu-ZI/AAAAAAAAC3k/W0ULRL4YFn0ewzBSuAF1B_i-daFR_IHrw/s1600/antirrhinum.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A crumby excel graph of proportion fruits damaged.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
What does this all mean? Obviously, it means that mammalian and insect herbivores are responding to different plant traits. What they are exactly, I'm not sure (especially for mammals). If anyone (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) were to repeat this experiment, with a larger sample size, and maybe some other mechanistic experiments (perhaps cage controls and lots more trait data to see what is different in the water control and rainfall manip groups), I think its a pretty good system that someone could get a paper - if not a few - out of.Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-18767625112109033702016-01-18T17:00:00.002-08:002016-12-06T16:00:43.294-08:00Cheap and unstealable bicycle taillight instructionsThis is the first non-ecology/evolution post on this blog, but bike safety is another important subject in the world and one of very few that I feel qualified to write about publicly. Because you want every chance against the moron driver reading his/her cell phone and not paying attention to the road around his/her four-ton SUV, it is important to be visible. Reflectors are necessary, but having a taillight in addition is always a good idea.<br />
<br />
(EDIT/UPDATE, 12/2016 - I switched from using the cheaper lights shown in the pictures here - to using 5050 lights, which are a quite a bit brighter. I think the added brightness is worth it, and they aren't much more expensive. I don't know what it does to battery life. - I've also switched from hot glue to heat shrink tubing, but hot glue is still cheaper and more people have a hot glue gun than a heat gun)<br />
<br />
In Davis, and likely elsewhere, head- and taillights are stolen constantly and decent ones are expensive (>$20). I suspect those two reasons are why so many folks in Davis don't have taillights (don't get me started on helmets!).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-T8_Twa4FsOM/Vp2AZdz3HhI/AAAAAAAACto/J6ryl-NR0aQ/s1600/a1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-T8_Twa4FsOM/Vp2AZdz3HhI/AAAAAAAACto/J6ryl-NR0aQ/s640/a1.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A cheap - ~ $2 taillight. Brighter than many on the market, weatherproof, long-lasting...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Building a cheap taillight that isn't likely to get stolen is fairly easy - and as a bonus, this is brighter than most of the more expensive ones! Here's a quick run-through of the materials and how to do it. It took me less than 10 minutes, even while taking these photos.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aqiIAfdvJys/Vp2B5zXW3TI/AAAAAAAACt0/xgSQVeDIUnU/s1600/a3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aqiIAfdvJys/Vp2B5zXW3TI/AAAAAAAACt0/xgSQVeDIUnU/s640/a3.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Really all you need is a 9V battery terminal, 2 sections of red LED and ~6 inches of two colors of wire.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b>Materials (in two parts):</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Things you already have:</b><br />
<br />
Hot glue gun/glue<br />
Soldering iron/solder<br />
Electrical tape<br />
Zip ties<br />
Wire (I used 22 gauge)<br />
<br />
<b>Things you may need to buy:</b><br />
<br />
9V battery terminal (2.99 for 5 at RadioShack, WAY cheaper online in bulk - free if you take it out of some old piece of electronics!)<br />
Red <i><u>outdoor</u></i> LED strip lights (this is the kicker - its about $10 for 5 meters - you'll need about 4" - but useful for all sorts of projects or you could make ~90 sets of tail lights).<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xdI9OAaPFWk/Vp2Cy690r5I/AAAAAAAACt8/lIwcdDCIsA4/s1600/a9.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xdI9OAaPFWk/Vp2Cy690r5I/AAAAAAAACt8/lIwcdDCIsA4/s640/a9.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Royce Union's seat stays. Note already flaking paint - not going to screw anything up here. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Plug in your soldering iron and hot glue gun.<br />
<br />
Next, place your battery terminal under the seat, the LEDs where you want them, and cut 4 pieces of wire to reach between the two. then strip each wire - on one side strip about 3mm and the other about 8 mm. Strip the ends of the battery wires about 8 mm if they need it, too.<br />
<br />
Now cut a section of LED at the cut points (noted on the strip, on mine, these are every 3 lights). Cut the terminals out of the plastic on the LEDs.<br />
<br />
Decide which color wire is going to be hot (+) and ground (-). This is important in LEDs unlike normal light bulbs. Twist the two hot wires (8mm stripped end) together with the red wire leading from the terminal. Do the same with the black wire and other two.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OTfhv74J3h0/Vp2FAvuHTOI/AAAAAAAACuQ/5g4P1RkuNv4/s1600/a5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OTfhv74J3h0/Vp2FAvuHTOI/AAAAAAAACuQ/5g4P1RkuNv4/s640/a5.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Soldered connections. Yellow is my "hot" wire, blue my ground. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Time to do some really easy soldering. place your soldering iron on one side of the twisted together connection - wait for it to heat up and draw solder through the other side to get a good solid connection (see above).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wzo4BqSiS6Y/Vp2DjaPucNI/AAAAAAAACuE/AjO_2sP-D0k/s1600/a4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wzo4BqSiS6Y/Vp2DjaPucNI/AAAAAAAACuE/AjO_2sP-D0k/s640/a4.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px;">LEDs with solder on the copper contact points.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now get a drop of solder on the copper contacts on each LED (see picture above). Place the tip of your soldering iron on the copper and the tip of your solder a hair away also on the copper - let the copper heat up and draw the solder instead of melting the solder directly on the iron.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yPrLwH-mJgw/Vp2FfiTABLI/AAAAAAAACug/KCdiuVhmL6g/s1600/a14.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yPrLwH-mJgw/Vp2FfiTABLI/AAAAAAAACug/KCdiuVhmL6g/s640/a14.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Solder drawn through the 3mm stripped ends. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Then draw solder into the wires on each of the 4 on the 3 mm stripped end. Now look for + and - signs on the LED contacts and line up your wires. The soldering here is easy - without using any solder, press your presoldered wire onto the top of the little solder bubble on the correct contact. With a little pressure, the solder from the contact and the wire will melt together and you will get a good contact (see below).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-2vM80dNV333pjxAoiPCMbbL1ePlToZxNa-GW34EOdQ4a6rA3Uz5AZq0ZAdA9JrAniJjQXEz0zjYxcmD6Zq2nP5EkEzQAe_bBHy4oIdGyk1g1OFoLHCNzLGW_RWbQJB2eHseoDjv7hjJT/s1600/a6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-2vM80dNV333pjxAoiPCMbbL1ePlToZxNa-GW34EOdQ4a6rA3Uz5AZq0ZAdA9JrAniJjQXEz0zjYxcmD6Zq2nP5EkEzQAe_bBHy4oIdGyk1g1OFoLHCNzLGW_RWbQJB2eHseoDjv7hjJT/s640/a6.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Good connections to the LEDs. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now test your connections - gently tug them (don't PULL) and then put the battery in.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PFV5W6iM_zM/Vp2G-FhblLI/AAAAAAAACus/DZkhPIKFHl8/s1600/a8.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PFV5W6iM_zM/Vp2G-FhblLI/AAAAAAAACus/DZkhPIKFHl8/s640/a8.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Good connections. Make sure not to cross your two soldered connections, as it looks like is occuring here (though it actually isn't). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Cut off a little bit of e-tape and wrap each of the 2 to 1 wire connections. Use your hot glue gun and place a nice bead of glue over the just soldered LEDs - this will waterproof that connection (which would short with just a little water). Make sure the hot glue goes over any exposed wire or copper contact on the LEDs.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kbETGRTL0rQ/Vp2Hejb23cI/AAAAAAAACu0/c2w8Lqss2kM/s1600/a10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kbETGRTL0rQ/Vp2Hejb23cI/AAAAAAAACu0/c2w8Lqss2kM/s640/a10.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Waterproofed!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now mount it up to the bike. This will depend on your set-up. I used zip-ties and super glue - I wasn't worried about ruining the paint on this older, cheaper, beat up bike. If you are, use double-sided tape or zip tie the LED strip on. The adhesive backing on the LEDs themselves are junk - you'll have to do something else. I mounted the 9V under the seat, where it is unobtrusive and less likely to get really wet.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dOcDtkauQJw/Vp2IMsnCLUI/AAAAAAAACvA/84dpXH4yTHE/s1600/a11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dOcDtkauQJw/Vp2IMsnCLUI/AAAAAAAACvA/84dpXH4yTHE/s640/a11.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Mounted and working! Note the battery zip tied to the seat rail. Make sure your seat is in good position if you do that. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
My back of the envelope calculations for battery life expect about 10 hours with a GOOD QUALITY 9V battery and the LED draw that was on the packaging (not sure whether that is correct). Don't buy batteries at the dollar store. Also note - most LED strips, including the one I used, run brightest at 12V (and are "rated" at 12V). On my other bike, I run the longer strips off a 6V battery (and have 2' of wire, which allows voltage drop) and red works fine, however, it won't run clear or green. Red is the least sensitive to low voltage and it draws the least (good for battery life!).<br />
<br />
(UPDATE: that same battery is going strong 11 months later. I commute on this bike often, though I didn't for about 5 months of the field season. I don't know how many hours I have over the 11 months, but I'll bet its well over 10!).<br />
<br />
Now you can use the rest of the LED strip for other projects...<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6TAnKJDvn6Y/Vp2I6bp_ykI/AAAAAAAACvI/1Y3F9RvFWFM/s1600/a13.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6TAnKJDvn6Y/Vp2I6bp_ykI/AAAAAAAACvI/1Y3F9RvFWFM/s640/a13.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Late 1950's Huffy Daisy Daisy tandem, with green "ground effects". Currently powered off a 12V motorcycle battery (would probably last a year on it!), but I'll get a rechargable 12V pack for it eventually (still working out the kinks of the bike - it was in many boxes when I bought it a couple months ago). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-79475519531924198242015-12-04T11:38:00.002-08:002015-12-04T11:38:11.246-08:00Mark and recapture project for students!I've had the pleasure of teaching many groups children from preschool to high school age during the last decade or so in a variety of settings: camps, classrooms, field trips and informal natural history discoveries on the sidewalk (just recently jumping galls in the Central Valley here).<br />
<br />
One activity that I have done a few times, and particularly enjoyed, was doing a mark and recapture study on dragonflies with elementary/middle school students. In my opinion, it is a pretty perfect project - you get to teach the scientific method, a little bit of math, and a good bit of natural history. I didn't come up with this project (I think Taylor Yeager, of Mass Audubon, suggested doing it with grasshoppers, initially - but that was the summer of 2006 or 2007, so my memory is a bit hazy) but I've run it a few times with kids from ~9 years old to high school age.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4oYl3EKNhjI/VmHiT2CUPRI/AAAAAAAACrA/Th0DMAQDxnE/s1600/IMG_9726.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4oYl3EKNhjI/VmHiT2CUPRI/AAAAAAAACrA/Th0DMAQDxnE/s640/IMG_9726.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Hetaerina americana</i>, the American rubyspot, my favorite odonate in California. A damselfly, these are just as suitable for the study described here, though a little more fragile. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The goal of the project is simply to estimate the number of dragonflies in a given area such as a large field or a pond. You could easily adapt this to grasshoppers, milkweed beetles or any other larger invertebrate that can be easily handled and marked (bumblebees or butterflies might not be as good). Mark and recapture is a standard technique used in wildlife studies and the basic idea of it is very simple - you mark a known number of animals, then you go back and capture a bunch and see what proportion of that sample was marked. Obviously, in real-world applications, <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/1939816?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents" target="_blank">the math is much more complicated</a>, but for our purposes, if we mark ten bugs the first day and capture 10 the second day, two of which are marked, we have a population size of 50.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-q-MJx061VPE/T2aygqlqP5I/AAAAAAAAAxI/QDhbrqcWUOY/s1600/IMG_3004.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-q-MJx061VPE/T2aygqlqP5I/AAAAAAAAAxI/QDhbrqcWUOY/s640/IMG_3004.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You'll almost certainly see <i>Pantala flavescens</i>, the world's most widespread dragonfly. Catching them is a bit harder - they fly high and fast! This is a female. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Dragonflies are supremely suited to this activity however. They are often abundant, easy to handle and mark, children generally have no aversion to them and they are just challenging enough to catch to occupy students for hours (and to get lots of energy out while running around the field with nets!).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wN2CIN902_c/Tv_CpEsNFpI/AAAAAAAAAls/MKkSezkD8nE/s1600/Aeshna-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wN2CIN902_c/Tv_CpEsNFpI/AAAAAAAAAls/MKkSezkD8nE/s640/Aeshna-2.jpg" width="474" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Rhionaeschna </i>sp. Chiloe Island, Chile. WHO DOESN'T LOVE DRAGONFLIES?!?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Of course, the first thing you should do is to get all the students to guess the number of dragonflies in that area. They generally have no idea; guesses vary by orders of magnitude (from 10 to 1 million!). Then it is just a matter of giving everyone nets, teaching them to safely handle dragonflies and going out and catching 'em. We've used normal sharpies and put a dark band on both forewings of the individuals we captured as a mark. For easier record-keeping, we set up a station in the center with the sharpies. I found with younger students, it was easier (and safer for the insect) if I took it out of the net and marked it (those being the two steps where wings are easily shredded or broken), then let the students identify and measure it. Taking dragonflies out of nets isn't hard - put your pointer and middle fingers on opposite sides of their body and gently move their wings up so that you have all four together and remove from net. Even 12 year-olds can remove and mark with proper instruction. Most dragons will need a few seconds to pump haemolymph back into their wings after this process; you can place the <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=7l5UAp4AAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank">dragonfly on the catcher's nose</a> - this is especially entertaining for all others involved!<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><br />
<br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nvkEw-DXwhw/VmHiRVYpnsI/AAAAAAAACqw/AWlXnFLcCTM/s1600/IMG_0300.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nvkEw-DXwhw/VmHiRVYpnsI/AAAAAAAACqw/AWlXnFLcCTM/s640/IMG_0300.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">An <i>Aeshna/Rhionaeschna</i> sp. This is the proper way to hold dragonflies; using two fingers, pinch the four wings together gently. To mark it with sharpie, it helps to put the wings flat on a clipboard and gently put a small mark. This is a female - note the lack of a bulge on the bottom of the first couple abdominal segements (compare to photos below). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eoIl7-cyIHg/T2awYXGMtJI/AAAAAAAAAw4/wGmNKVzfGw4/s1600/IMG_3071.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eoIl7-cyIHg/T2awYXGMtJI/AAAAAAAAAw4/wGmNKVzfGw4/s640/IMG_3071.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The other way to hold dragonflies is to firmly grip the upper segments of their legs (I usually try to hold two - though I am holding only one in this photo) between thumb and forefinger. This allows viewing of the wing pattern and veination, but is trickier and requires some practice to not rip off legs and let the dragonfly get away. They can also bite you in this grip, not a problem for little ones, but big Aeshnids can draw blood!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
With high school groups, I've taught them how to sex the dragonflies and then made comparisons of male and female sizes and sex ratios. This is an interesting activity, as in upland areas, most caught are females and near water bodies, most are males (you can count on this result with all but a few uncommon species). The reason is that males of most species patrol territories near prime egg-laying spots and catch the females and mate with them immediately prior to egg laying. Females, being harassed constantly near water, generally forage in areas farther away. This is especially pronounced in <i>Enallagma</i> damselflies - the bright blue males may be found by the hundreds at any pond, but its really hard to find the duller females nearby - sex rations on a local scale may be 100:1 or more!<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qcrn_QqxIF0/ToKZ-M2n6MI/AAAAAAAAAO0/Dxu2hnSVAUw/s1600/pd1.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qcrn_QqxIF0/ToKZ-M2n6MI/AAAAAAAAAO0/Dxu2hnSVAUw/s640/pd1.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Blue dasher, Pachydiplax longipennis, one of the most abundant dragonflies in the US. Note the water mites on its abdomen - these have really interesting natural histories (too long to describe here, but look them up). Also, note the bulge on the lower side of the first couple abdominal segments - this is a male (compare above). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The next day, we go back out and catch them again - to avoid double counting individuals, we use a second color sharpie on these. Then we conclude by doing the calculation of total population size, figuring out who was closest (the most exciting part for the students) and discussing the drawbacks. The students have always come up with good hypotheses for why the estimate might not be accurate (there were too many high-flying dragonflies, one day was cloudy, etc.) and it generally provides good fodder for a short and informative discussion. With older students, summary statistics on sex ratio, the body size measurements and population sizes of each species can be done and discussed.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirjGufphbIiR3Jeza9X-HbgP9MSlS0FRMi8C53j5UnLmVkqjTau8NGi2JSzMEycDbvgqHlvr3cmuzyMSYfPeEa7IUPoDp-i43ULF8lx9ELYdBerm3oBF8K3NI-ct_vawB0vbhi3GlbRQIU/s1600/svt.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirjGufphbIiR3Jeza9X-HbgP9MSlS0FRMi8C53j5UnLmVkqjTau8NGi2JSzMEycDbvgqHlvr3cmuzyMSYfPeEa7IUPoDp-i43ULF8lx9ELYdBerm3oBF8K3NI-ct_vawB0vbhi3GlbRQIU/s640/svt.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The only individuals we don't mark are tenerals - these are just emerged and they have not fully dried their wings and marking would almost certainly hurt them). Note the glistening wings and really pale body. In another day or two, this <i>Sympetrum</i> sp. will be cherry red!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JnHCR9Btbes/TsL09Tk5FeI/AAAAAAAAAYg/m1CPH3rT4ZE/s1600/Nov%2B11-14%2B189.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JnHCR9Btbes/TsL09Tk5FeI/AAAAAAAAAYg/m1CPH3rT4ZE/s640/Nov%2B11-14%2B189.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No dragonfly post would be complete without this monster. Arguably the world's largest dragonfly, <i>Phenes raptor</i> lives in bogs in Patagonian Chile and Argentina and has somewhat terrestrial nymphs, an oddity for an odonate. Males also have the coolest set of abdominal claspers (those projections at the tip of the abdomen) of any of the hundreds of species I've seen! </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhR77vNT4PV1b2KHGM4XY8BFcnSBmcZd_zIIt5ydbhIaUzE8fbCtjdrsG8yj7y0NtB2IRxgFcTfgXTQohT497sRj6SWJwcWdox4T4X-1DtjfaUxCbQQ9HIX1ffnT3CnjfQYdqQRDcqGTjF/s1600/Nov+11-14+310.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhR77vNT4PV1b2KHGM4XY8BFcnSBmcZd_zIIt5ydbhIaUzE8fbCtjdrsG8yj7y0NtB2IRxgFcTfgXTQohT497sRj6SWJwcWdox4T4X-1DtjfaUxCbQQ9HIX1ffnT3CnjfQYdqQRDcqGTjF/s640/Nov+11-14+310.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The eyes of emeralds, family Corduliidae, lend them that common name. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<br />
What you'll need (not very much!):<br />
<br />
1) Nets - 1 per student is ideal, but partners are fine, too. Wooden-handled aerial nets are not expensive (<$10) and will last a long time and take a good bit of abuse.<br />
2) Sharpies<br />
3) A good field guide. I use Dennis Paulson's excellent guides for the US, though there are really good regional ones, like Blair Nikula's Massachusetts guides and others. Identifying dragonflies and damselflies in all but a few genera (<i>Sympetrum, Enallagma</i>) is really simple and can be done by most high school age children with pretty good accuracy.<br />
4) Clipboard, data sheets.<br />
5) Two days of predicted sunny weather!<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1Mws-BBKoWE/T2axtUlzXeI/AAAAAAAAAxA/VEwC7rV-qcg/s1600/IMGP03341.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1Mws-BBKoWE/T2axtUlzXeI/AAAAAAAAAxA/VEwC7rV-qcg/s640/IMGP03341.jpg" width="480" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You could have students make nets. During a trip to Peru, my net was stolen within a week. I bought some mosquito netting, bailing wire and made this net for <$1. It lasted me the whole season without issue - several of the dragonflies on this page were caught with it. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Do give this a try next year if you have students for a couple days! Let me know if you do, I'd love to hear how it goes.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-omle_v4TyLs/T1kEJp5epvI/AAAAAAAAAwQ/i693Md8kOoE/s1600/pflavescens.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="480" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-omle_v4TyLs/T1kEJp5epvI/AAAAAAAAAwQ/i693Md8kOoE/s640/pflavescens.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Another interesting thing to note - and could be measured by the students - is the size of the wings (length, width). This dragonfly, <i>Pantala flavescens,</i> has HUGE wings for its size. Unsurprisingly this species is probably the most migratory and best dispersing insect - of any group - on earth. You can find this species near you - pretty much nomatter where you live!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rKYx1K9zZ6M/ToKbndJOCjI/AAAAAAAAAPA/Kwpb524jZHw/s1600/sr1.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rKYx1K9zZ6M/ToKbndJOCjI/AAAAAAAAAPA/Kwpb524jZHw/s640/sr1.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A meadowhawk (<i>Sympetrum</i> sp.) like above. This is a male - told by the bulge in the abdominal segments as well as its red color (females of this genus are yellowish). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-90489045428062400402015-11-02T16:34:00.002-08:002015-11-02T16:34:36.241-08:00Classic Natural History II: Netje Blanchan's WildflowersSay what you will about Google Scholar's dominance of scientific literature searching and potentially indexing too much (see specific critiques <a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/2014/11/04/google-scholar-is-filled-with-junk-science/" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="https://etechlib.wordpress.com/2013/01/23/whats-wrong-with-google-scholar-for-systematic-reviews/" target="_blank">here</a>), but its inclusiveness means that it turns up a wide array of literature that I wouldn't normally encounter reading the citations of papers or using a more traditional scientific search tool. I often need to spend some time separating the wheat from the chaff (<a href="http://rofpm.com/post/28646244140/andrea-klenotiz-i-sent-this-paper-to-jk-rowling?route=%2Fpost%2F%3Aid%2F%3Asummary" target="_blank">this somehow got archived</a> as a scholarly work), but its often worth it.<br />
<br />
Part of the <a href="http://www.ericflopresti.com/uploads/4/0/6/1/40619833/lopresti_pearse_charles_2015.pdf" target="_blank">columbine paper I published recently</a> was a list I had been working on for awhile; all the insect-entrapping plants I had come across myself, friends and colleagues had mentioned and I'd encountered in the literature. I hoped it would be a jumping off point for future investigations into the functions of sticky exudates in these plants. It is a most-incomplete list, especially in lesser-studied parts of the world. I added quite a few new genera to it while travelling in Chile (and Chile is well-studied, plus I did spanish language searches as well!). So I expect the list to grow steadily in the coming years.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3r3hVgGp7Rs/Vjfs8-X9F5I/AAAAAAAACmY/vCiC_TjXJsI/s1600/blanchan3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="434" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3r3hVgGp7Rs/Vjfs8-X9F5I/AAAAAAAACmY/vCiC_TjXJsI/s640/blanchan3.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Two of my favorite plants (I have a lot of them). Blanchan writes of the <i>Impatiens</i>: "These exquisite, bright flowers, hanging at a horizontal, like jewels from a lady's ear, may be responsible for
the plant's folk name; but whoever is abroad early on a dewy morning, or after a shower, and finds notched
edges of the drooping leaves hung with scintillating gems, dancing, sparkling in the sunshine, sees still
another reason for naming this the jewel-weed."<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Today, while looking up plants for another project, I happened on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neltje_Blanchan" target="_blank">Netje Blanchan's</a> book Wildflowers Worth Knowing (free pdf <a href="http://www.growingfreedom.yolasite.com/resources/blanchanetext02wldfl10.pdf" target="_blank">here</a> - thanks <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/" target="_blank">Project Gutenberg</a>). The copy I read, with that title, is an adaptation/reprint of her 1900 book <a href="https://archive.org/details/naturesgarden00blan" target="_blank">Nature's Garden</a>. Blanchan was a popular science writer who authored another natural history book, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_Neighbors" target="_blank">Bird Neighbors (1897)</a>, that I picked up at a used book sale awhile back and really enjoyed. Her observations on both birds and wildflowers are astounding - she knew her subjects well and wrote about them effortlessly. Her observations on the ecology and behavior are astounding and the book reads quite differently from modern field guides on wildflowers.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqNNeDw25lE/VjftYKZToFI/AAAAAAAACmg/5RfxbmVRaxw/s1600/blanchan1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqNNeDw25lE/VjftYKZToFI/AAAAAAAACmg/5RfxbmVRaxw/s640/blanchan1.jpg" width="468" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is a very pretty plate, but imagine trying to find an unknown word in a key from this...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
She notes the key characteristics of each plant, as well as her observations of it, including ecology, mostly focused on pollination (apparently a passion of hers), but also herbivores, interactions with other plants, and interesting anecdotes and even literary references. This is the sort of guide that guides<i> a nature walk </i>(with discussion and appreciation of each organism), not just an identification (i.e. a latin name).<br />
<br />
For instance, while discussing <i>Pseudognaphalium</i>, she notes: "Ever conspicuous among the larger visitors [is] the beautiful Hunter's butterfly (<i>Pyrameis huntera</i>) [the American Painted Lady, <i>Vanessa virginiensis</i>], to be distinguished from its sister the painted lady, always seen about
thistles, by the two large eye-like spots on the under side of the hind wings. What are these butterflies doing
about their chosen plants? Certainly the minute florets of the everlasting offer no great inducements to a
creature that lives only on nectar. But that [shelter], <a href="https://centralfloridacritteroftheday.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/americanladycaterpillarapr2013.jpg" target="_blank">compactly woven with silk and petals</a>, which hangs from
the stem, tells the story of the hunter's butterfly's presence. A brownish-drab chrysalis, or a slate-colored and
black-banded little caterpillar with tufts of hairs on its back, and pretty red and white dots on the dark stripes,
shows our butterfly in the earlier stages of its existence, when the everlastings form its staple diet." Not only do you get your flower identified, but you are encouraged to look for the butterfly and the caterpillar - which are, as she notes, very common around this genus, in my experience in both New England and California.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t-pSYfEA8ok/VjfyxZEfsoI/AAAAAAAACmw/QjdPR65Ud-I/s1600/blanchan%2B4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="434" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t-pSYfEA8ok/VjfyxZEfsoI/AAAAAAAACmw/QjdPR65Ud-I/s640/blanchan%2B4.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> I'm not sure whether these are post-processing colored, or produced in color (apparently available commercially at that time, according to Wikipedia). The left plant is now <i>Aureolaria virginica</i>, and like all <i>Aureolaria</i> is a hemiparasite (photosynthesizes and obtains some nutrition from its host). On this genus, she describes nectar-robbing as: "<span style="text-align: start;">Sometimes small bees, despairing of getting into the tube through the mouth, suck at holes in the flower's sides, because legitimate feasting was made too difficult for the poor little things".</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
To get back to the list of sticky plants that I referenced earlier, Blanchan includes quite a number of observations of sticky plants in the descriptions, including a couple that I didn't have on the list! She had me at the introduction - noting "Is it enough to know merely the name of the flower you meet in the meadow? The blossom has an inner
meaning, hopes and fears that inspire its brief existence, a scheme of salvation for its species in the struggle
for survival that it has been slowly perfecting with some insect's help through the ages. ... Do you doubt it? Then study the mechanism of one of our common orchids or milkweeds that are adjusted
with such marvelous delicacy to the length of a bee's tongue or of a butterfly's leg; learn why so many flowers
have sticky calices or protective hairs.... What of the sundew that not only catches insects, but secretes gastric juice to digest them?
What of the bladderwort, in whose inflated traps tiny crustaceans are imprisoned, or the pitcher plant, that
makes soup of its guests?"<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EzcWCIH9j4I/Vjf2axCT3WI/AAAAAAAACm8/w-Luu-Hags4/s1600/blanchan2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="432" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EzcWCIH9j4I/Vjf2axCT3WI/AAAAAAAACm8/w-Luu-Hags4/s640/blanchan2.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Organized by flower color and shape, it is easy to see how dogwood (Rosaceae) and button-bush (Rubiaceae: coffee family!) got placed next to each other. Of button-bush she writes " the vicinity of
this bush is an excellent place for a butterfly collector to carry his net. Butterflies are by far the most abundant
visitors; honey-bees also abound, bumblebees, carpenter and mining bees, wasps, a horde of flies, and some
destructive beetles; but the short tongues can reach little nectar"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Her list of sticky plants include three new ones for my list:<br />
<br />
<i>Persicaria amphibia</i> "When the amphibious water persicaria (<i>P. amphibium</i>) lifts its short, dense, rose-colored ovoid or
oblong club of bloom above ponds and lakes, it is sufficiently protected from crawling pilferers, of course, by
the water in which it grows. But suppose the pond dries up and the plant is left on dry ground, what then?
Now, a remarkable thing happens: protective glandular, sticky hairs appear on the epidermis of the leaves and
stems, which were perfectly smooth when the flowers grew in water. Such small wingless insects as might
pilfer nectar without bringing to their hostess any pollen from other blossoms are held as fast as on bird-lime"<br />
<br />
This is extremely interesting and represents a whole new plant family for the list. While I've encountered this plant many times, I've never looked closely enough at it. I wonder if in this environment the glandularity serves as a direct or indirect defense, or whether it reduces water loss? I'm going to pay a whole lot more attention to this plant now.<br />
<br />
<i>Pseudognaphalium macounii</i>: A new genus for the list, though I know that other Pseudognaphalium species I've seen do not catch insects. She writes: "Ants, which are trying to steal nectar, usually getting killed on the sticky, cottony stem".<br />
<br />
<i>Aureolaria pedicularia</i> is another new genus and species for the list. I found it in August in Massachusetts and noted its stickiness, but did not observe as Blanchan did: "Pilfering ants find death as speedy on the sticky surfaces here as on any catchfly."<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
She notes several other genera, which are on the list, notably <i>Cuphea, Rhododendron, Kalmia</i> (Charley Eisemann has excellent photos of this <a href="https://bugtracks.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/sticky-plants/" target="_blank">here</a>), <i>Saxifraga</i>, several <i>Polemoniaceae</i> and, of course, the catchflies - <i>Silene</i>. </div>
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Urd_Ucae43U/Vjf4pKXWx9I/AAAAAAAACnI/1zVV1fVvg5w/s1600/blanchan5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Urd_Ucae43U/Vjf4pKXWx9I/AAAAAAAACnI/1zVV1fVvg5w/s640/blanchan5.jpg" width="458" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A. canadensis is not a sticky columbine, but it is hummingbird pollinated and beautiful. "Fragile butterflies, absolutely dependent on nectar, hover near our showy wild columbine with its five tempting horns of plenty, but sail away again, knowing as they do that their weak legs are not calculated to stand the strain of an inverted position from a pendent flower". </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
She waxes eloquently several times of <i>Silene</i>'s stickiness: "Alas, for the tiny creatures that
try to climb up the rosy tufts to pilfer nectar, they and their relatives are not so innocent as they appear! While
the little crawlers are almost within reach of the cup of sweets, their feet are gummed to the viscid matter that
coats it, and here their struggles end as flies' do on sticky fly-paper, or birds' on limed twigs. A naturalist
counted sixty-two little corpses on the sticky stem of a single pink. All this tragedy to protect a little nectar for
the butterflies which, in sipping it, transfer the pollen from one flower to another, and so help them to produce
the most beautiful and robust offspring."<br />
<br />
"Although a popular
name for the genus is catchfly, it is usually the ant that is glued to the viscid parts, for the fly that moves
through the air alights directly on the flower it is too short-lipped to suck. An ant catching its feet on the
miniature lime-twig, at first raises one foot after another and draws it through its mouth, hoping to rid it of the
sticky stuff, but only with the result of gluing up its head and other parts of the body. In ten minutes all the
pathetic struggles are ended. Let no one guilty of torturing flies to death on sticky paper condemn the Silenes!"<br />
<br />
"Hapless ants,
starting to crawl up the stem, become more and more discouraged by its stickiness, and if they persevere in
their attempts to steal from the butterfly's legitimate preserves, death overtakes their erring feet as speedily as
if they ventured on sticky fly paper. How humane is the way to protect flowers from crawling thieves that has
been adopted by the high-bush cranberry and the partridge pea (q.v.), among other plants! These provide a
free lunch of sweets in the glands of their leaves to satisfy pilferers, which then seek no farther, leaving the
flowers to winged insects that are at once despoilers and benefactors."<br />
<br />
While a perfectly valid hypothesis - taken from careful observation, we now know that extra-floral nectaries usually assist the "pilferers" in defending the plant (but maybe not always - I bet that her situation occurs sometimes!). It is worth noting that in some species, having EFNs separated from flowers may keen the defending ants from attacking pollinators, so the separation of the "pilferers" from the flowers, as she notes, may be important for the plant's success.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ou3Ke7KTkrk/Vjf_8PRenYI/AAAAAAAACnY/Xu_fFz1fIQs/s1600/blanchan%2B6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ou3Ke7KTkrk/Vjf_8PRenYI/AAAAAAAACnY/Xu_fFz1fIQs/s640/blanchan%2B6.jpg" width="462" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Of bee balm, she writes "Gorgeous, glowing scarlet heads of bee balm arrest the dullest eye, bracts and upper leaves often taking on
blood-red color, too, as if it had dripped from the lacerated flowers. Where their vivid doubles are reflected in
a shadowy mountain stream, not even the cardinal flower is more strikingly beautiful. Thrifty clumps
transplanted from Nature's garden will spread about ours and add a splendor like the flowers of salvia, next of
kin, if only the roots get a frequent soaking. " Even horticultural advice is proffered!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I'm going to use this book now to look up any new plant I come across; her excellent observations and interesting thoughts (an appendix for "Unpleasantly scented" plants), I'm sure will come in handy in guiding my future research, and just as importantly, my enjoyment of nature. Like Thomas Huxley once said "To a person uninstructed in natural history, his country or seaside stroll is a walk through a gallery filled with wonderful works of art, nine-tenths of which have their faces turned to the wall." Blanchan's book turns those pieces around; giving valuable natural history information, in an easy to read fashion, for each species covered.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*"Liming" refers to the practice of coating a branch with a sticky substance to entrap songbirds, usually for consumption. While illegal in many places, it is still practiced and was the subject of an article in Nat Geo a couple years ago. <a href="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/songbird-migration/franzen-text" target="_blank">A pretty illustrative picture accompanies the article</a>. </span>Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-82842299899791803172015-10-29T14:59:00.002-07:002015-10-29T14:59:31.574-07:00Trichostema laxum research update: the first interesting data? Awhile back, I wrote about <a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2015/01/beginning-research-floral-polymorphisms.html" target="_blank">the beginnings of some research on <i>Trichostema laxum</i></a>. I've been slogging through the disappointing amount of data I gathered this field season and doing a little bit of writing. While I was, and still am, really excited about the project on <i>T. laxum</i>, it took a backseat to columbine and tarweed work this field season (most of which burned up). I did get some new data and perhaps gained some insight into the system. <div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--Z9tE5tzHUI/VjJomhIiQ1I/AAAAAAAACkY/dFUnrsAf4ek/s1600/aIMG_0587.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--Z9tE5tzHUI/VjJomhIiQ1I/AAAAAAAACkY/dFUnrsAf4ek/s640/aIMG_0587.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A normal array of plants in the site: normal purple <i>Trichostema laxum</i>, an individual with the common white and purple lower lip phenotype and some <i>Zeltnera trichantha</i> intermixed (a really cool plant)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
My main question in the system is: how is this polymorphism in flower color maintained? If it were a fitness benefit, we might expect a high proportion of it. If it were deleterious, it should be lost (especially as it is at reasonably low frequency). If it is neutral, it might be drifted out. I actually suspect the answer is quite a bit more complicated. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PGZKNiCK6rk/VjJrVHhjvZI/AAAAAAAACkk/NrBKQpGOEMs/s1600/aIMG_6743.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="430" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PGZKNiCK6rk/VjJrVHhjvZI/AAAAAAAACkk/NrBKQpGOEMs/s640/aIMG_6743.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Once you start looking for variation, you find it! I don't know what this doubled lower lip is about (it showed up in a plant grown in the greenhouse - on most flowers). The plant was male-sterile, I believe. I'll be looking for it in the field though!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
The first question is, of course, how common is the color polymorph? I censused the focal patch/population (separated by ~300 meters from others) in 2014 and 2015. In 2014, the polymorph was 2.0% (46/2278 individuals) in 2015, 3.7% (102/2757). Neither of these censuses was a complete census of the population - necessarily, I cannot assess the phenotype of any pre- or post-flowering individuals. Both were done roughly in the peak flowering time (over several days), so I do think it is close to accurate. I think its safe to conclude that the proportion stayed the same or even went slightly up in 2015. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Joyd2mPEgR8/VjKT-NxWKQI/AAAAAAAAClY/oq4NjRs5jxk/s1600/wp1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Joyd2mPEgR8/VjKT-NxWKQI/AAAAAAAAClY/oq4NjRs5jxk/s640/wp1.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A rather large w/p morph individual. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
The next logical question is: do the two morphs have similar field fitness? Any "fitness" measure (e.g. reproductive success, height, etc.) of these plants is dictated mostly by microhabitat location. In this rocky, heavily serpentine site, most plants stay under 20 cm tall and never put out more than 50 flowers (mints have 4 ovaries per flower, so maximum seed set is four times flower number). In a wetter, less serpentine and rocky meadow, I once found a plant on a gopher mound (which brings up nutrients) that was nearly a meter wide and better than a half meter tall. It probably had >5000 flowers throughout the season. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Oaa7m-0gfUQ/VjJtNeKgTEI/AAAAAAAACkw/-kzfeYBWisE/s1600/aIMG_8310.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Oaa7m-0gfUQ/VjJtNeKgTEI/AAAAAAAACkw/-kzfeYBWisE/s640/aIMG_8310.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A veritable field of <i>Trichostema</i>! Not my field site - this site has huge plants (~500 flowers/plant) and very little flower color variation. It is a nice place to look at the insect communities on <i>T. laxum,</i> as it has really high densities of herbivores and predators (<i>T. laxum </i>gets most of the sticky plant predators)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Because of this microhabitat variation, the best comparison to make is nearest neighbors which differ in flower color. In both 2014 and 2015, I took data on 41 pairs (coincidentally!) of white/purple and purple/purple neighbors. I found no significant differences, either year, between any fitness variables (number of buds, flowers, fruit, height and, in 2014, number of leaves and herbivory [too low in 2015]).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u_YkRl1uAFg/VjKUM-YZzRI/AAAAAAAAClg/C1yGFz6PLXc/s1600/wp2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u_YkRl1uAFg/VjKUM-YZzRI/AAAAAAAAClg/C1yGFz6PLXc/s640/wp2.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A more normal-sized (for this population) individual. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
This, ostensibly, seems like the trait is fitness neutral (and lab growouts seem to bear this out - more data soonish). Given that this site burned in August this year (after most had flowered, but some [probably few] were still maturing seeds), I was curious about whether the morphs differed in phenology. Hindsight is 20/20 (I should have censused biweekly!), but the neighbor pairs data can be used to examine this in a roundabout way; I have data on buds, flowers and fruit, so later phenology plants should have a higher proportion of buds to flowers and fruit than earlier phenology plants. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In both years, the white/purple plants had a lower proportion of buds than the purple plants (it is marginally significant). This suggests that they have a earlier phenology - which could be what is under selection - not the flower color itself. I am super, super, super, excited about this (the only positive result so far from anything in <i>T. laxum</i>) - there was possibly a big selective event (a fire) on 12-August (I think - could have burned on the 13th). From this, I'd predict that the w/p morph may have dehisced a higher proportion of their seed set by the fire. I'll be paying far more attention to the phenology, and recensusing more often this upcoming season. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FtrxGwG1XLw/VjJy1GfBOQI/AAAAAAAAClA/7vF1Q1hlXlw/s1600/prop%2Bbuds.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FtrxGwG1XLw/VjJy1GfBOQI/AAAAAAAAClA/7vF1Q1hlXlw/s1600/prop%2Bbuds.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I also analyzed the pollinator data from 2014 and got no particularly useful insights (I wondered if there was some degree of isolation between the morphs). The pollinator communities using each morph were pretty similar and the only real differences were: a bee on a purple flower was more likely to visit a w/p next than a bee starting on a w/p* and, only bees that started on w/p flowers next visited a snapdragon, <i>Antirrhinum cornutum </i>(but only 3% of the time). This last result is interesting as the snapdragon also has whitish purple flowers AND the <i>T. laxum </i>population with the w/p flowers is the only one <i> </i>(out of ~15) I've found interspersed with large numbers of <i>A. cornutum</i>. I'll have to get MUCH better data for any hypotheses about its effect. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uNXk87RmtlY/VjKTkJY3MFI/AAAAAAAAClQ/D6-IfWn2WOM/s1600/unnamed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uNXk87RmtlY/VjKTkJY3MFI/AAAAAAAAClQ/D6-IfWn2WOM/s1600/unnamed.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Antirrhinum cornutum</i>, grown in lab, showing the pale purple/white flowers. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm working now on the "genetics" (well, inheritance, but that's as close as I ever get to ATGC) of the polymorphisms (this one and selfing). Could w/p be recessive and heterozygous in more individuals (~25% under HW assumptions)? I don't think it is (entirely) developmentally induced, as in the first grow out, I only got this polymorphism from this population (I grew individuals out from 4 populations). More soon! Do let me know if you have other ideas about the system!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xmjmJygSCQA/VjKV9StZzJI/AAAAAAAACls/oeeTHUaAdjY/s1600/cats.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xmjmJygSCQA/VjKV9StZzJI/AAAAAAAACls/oeeTHUaAdjY/s640/cats.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Heliothis phloxiphaga</i> was a very common herbivore on <i>T. laxum</i> in 2014 (this plant had two - I didn't stage this), but nearly absent in 2015 - though it was still common on columbines and tarweeds. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
*I think this is confounded, as I watched two plants during each observation - nearby plants that were similar in size. Therefore, I suspect that it was more likely that a bee on the p/p plant would encounter a w/p than one from the w/p. </div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-82818249448813341112015-10-12T16:47:00.003-07:002015-10-12T16:47:35.313-07:00Classic Natural History I: Anna Bateson's botanyI've lately had a little bit more free time, having had my experiments burned (more burned in the Jerusalem fire after I wrote the blog post about the Rocky Fire) and having just submitted a manuscript I'd been working on. So I've decided to spend a few hours a week reading older natural history and ecology papers. I've been working through the 1800's in <i>American Naturalist</i>, <i>Annals of Botany</i> and <i>Science Gossip</i> - a wonderful popular magazine including observations of natural history, short articles and summaries of research. I've done this haphazardly, reading the table of contents to find interesting articles. I surely let many interesting ones through, but there is practically limitless material, so that is unavoidable. <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm going to try to highlight some of these papers - the astute observations, clever experimentation, often beautiful writing, and a little history, too. I probably would have left out the last piece, but several things - including Charley Eisemann's beautiful <a href="https://bugtracks.wordpress.com/2011/08/28/annette-braun/" target="_blank">history/biography/natural history piece on Annette Braun</a>, a forgotten but influential naturalist; Graham <i>et al</i>'s <a href="http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/E/bo5437481.html" target="_blank">the Essential Naturalist</a>, and Bernd Heinrich's <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/285941.The_Snoring_Bird" target="_blank">biography of his father</a> - have inspired me over the past few years to think a bit more about the people and history behind old natural history.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nDVplspgP6M/VhxD-ljea5I/AAAAAAAACiM/1i4ryhHtiz4/s1600/nepenthes%2Bchelsoni.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nDVplspgP6M/VhxD-ljea5I/AAAAAAAACiM/1i4ryhHtiz4/s640/nepenthes%2Bchelsoni.jpg" width="522" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Many also have beautiful illustrations (like this domestic hybrid pitcher plant). From M.C. Cooke's <i><a href="https://archive.org/details/freaksmarvelsofp00cook" target="_blank">Freaks and Marvels of Plant Life</a> </i>(1882).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
A few papers I found that seemed quite cool were those of Anna Bateson (1863-1928). She was sister to William Bateson, a famous botanist of the day. <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=dgTJZZxXElAC&pg=PA80&lpg=PA80&dq=anna+bateson+botany&source=bl&ots=5PBp2SgM5R&sig=3l5xs26EPVRiSNpL_chqwxuFbNQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCkQ6AEwA2oVChMI1v-w-PO9yAIVCPNjCh1pow4-#v=onepage&q=anna%20&f=false" target="_blank">She worked at as an "assistant" </a>in Cambridge's <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/236151?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents" target="_blank">Balfour Biological Laboratory for woman students</a>, closely with Darwin's son Francis and built upon Darwin's plant work herself. <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=a2EK9P7-ZMsC&pg=PA39&lpg=PA39&dq=anna+bateson+cambridge&source=bl&ots=aN9Yp8Akot&sig=xZDxlFuhHwyKmzjWwyI82hbSgi4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAGoVChMIwti-0oq-yAIVjpaICh2Nmw6_#v=onepage&q=anna%20bateson%20cambridge&f=false" target="_blank">She helped found the Cambridge Women's Suffrage society in 1884</a>. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One thing I often appreciate about older papers is the lack of the standard paper formula (Intro, Methods, Results, Discussion), instead a more narrative style that presents data and observations where necessary in the story. Bateson's "<a href="http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/content/os-1/3-4/255.full.pdf" target="_blank">The effect of cross fertilization on inconspicuous flowers</a>" from Annals of Botany in 1888 is a really nicely laid out concise argument. She starts with Charles Darwin's observation that while many small flowers are selfing and not visited often by pollinators, it would be strange that they would still be open if they were completely selfing. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Darwin did not do these experiments because of the "difficulty of [crossing] them". Bateson did this tedious job for three species (of three families!) and found clear outcrossing benefits in all. Her experimental prowess is obvious, as is her sense of experimental design ("it would have been a better method to have obtained the self-fertilized seeds by artificial fertilization also"). And her conclusion - that outcrossing is a benefit to even usually-selfing plants is certainly correct. </div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ud47NW-vhvI/VhxFsUkADsI/AAAAAAAACiY/gp_ME9i7X8o/s1600/passiflora%2Btendrils.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ud47NW-vhvI/VhxFsUkADsI/AAAAAAAACiY/gp_ME9i7X8o/s640/passiflora%2Btendrils.jpg" width="568" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Also from Cooke's book, where he explains the actions of plant tendrils,<a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6098/1087.abstract" target="_blank"> a phenomenon still being researched mechanistically</a>.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Another clever experiment concerned geotropism. <a href="http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/content/os-2/1/65.full.pdf+html" target="_blank">She and Francis Darwin hypothesized,</a> based on prior theory, that a stem lying directly on the horizontal is the most stimulated to move. They note that this is actually harder to test than it might seem, as if you simply let a stem curl, it will be subjected to varying stimulus as it curls upward (if the hypothesis is correct). Cleverly, they came up with a method to expose plants to varying stimuli independent of their response, by pinning them down for two hours at a given angle (they use three: stem pointed 60 degrees up, 60 degrees down and horizontal). They then released all three treatments for an hour and measured the angle. They got quite clear data supporting their hypothesis. In both cabbage (n=36) and plantain (n = 148), horizontally-placed stems curved more intensely than either down-sloped or up-sloped stems. I don't know much about geotropism, so I can't actually comment on the lasting scientific value of this experiment, but it was an elegant and simple experiment (science fair? lab demonstration?). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The last paper is more of a monograph and concerns irregular flowers (i.e. not radially symmetric). Anna and her brother William detail many examples of abnormalities in flowers. They suggest that irregular flowers must have evolved from regular ancestors (<a href="http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1648/20130348" target="_blank">we know macroevolutionary patterns and part of the molecular basis for this now</a>) and that the best way to study the possibly evolutionary pathway is to look at variation in flowers now, to see what variation evolution is acting on in the present.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1HZhL7bJjBQr_xKJKdzEE2Vvzmg2h-2y4E9W3htqqnSwO1jFmRApQ8BKH_sWj5yl9VEhcklmo1UcBZW_pzQ9IkXEKRt1cyxFhN5P3Cf3SH-61BMveLdkjhf_XsjMGaIqqs5zVlmortpoN/s1600/bateson+and+bateson+1891.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1HZhL7bJjBQr_xKJKdzEE2Vvzmg2h-2y4E9W3htqqnSwO1jFmRApQ8BKH_sWj5yl9VEhcklmo1UcBZW_pzQ9IkXEKRt1cyxFhN5P3Cf3SH-61BMveLdkjhf_XsjMGaIqqs5zVlmortpoN/s640/bateson+and+bateson+1891.jpg" width="412" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Plate of floral mutants in Bateson and Bateson 1891.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
They write very clearly about natural selection and macroevolution in the introduction, making clear difficulties with the lack of intermediate forms, determining descent, and the apparent lack of utility of intermediate forms of an organ (essentially Paley's watchmaker argument addressed by Dawkins). They even mention punctuated equilibrium versus gradualism "Supposing, then, that such a series of ancestors were before us, the matter to be determined would be the degree to which the series is continuous or discontinuous: that is to say whether the differences between any one member and its immediate successor are so small as to be imperceptible, or whether there are distinct and palpable difference between them; or whether they are sometimes small, and sometimes so great as to cause interruptions in the series and divide it into groups". They follow this with a nice metaphor of evolution as chemistry or physics. They fall into Gould's camp, clearly thinking that evolution proceeds with discontinuities ("the objections to supposing that the process of evolution of forms is discontinuous are derived, firstly, from the scarcity of observed instances of sudden and large variation,,, it is in the hope of dispelling [this] objection that the present observations are recorded") [1].</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The crux of their careful observations of toadflax, speedwell, gladiolus, and <i>Streptocarpus</i> lie in the fact that they are characterizing mutants that show a phenotype of different regularity from the parent. Especially interesting are their findings of apparently radially symmetric speedwell (#19 in the plate) and varying symmetries in all the species examined. They conclude these detailed observations by pointing out that while gradualism may be common, mutations that fundamentally alter an essential feature of a species (regularity of the flower; or <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2012/09/19/the-birth-of-the-new-the-rewiring-of-the-old/#.Vhw_OflVhHw" target="_blank">Lenski and lab's digestion of citrate by E. coli</a>) do occur. They state "The facts now given, though few, are a contribution to such evidence and, in our judgement, are a sample of the kind of fact which is required to enable us to deal with the problems of descent". Given that we now know that during plant evolution, both to and from irregular flowers has occurred many times, it is likely that the Batesons' work was prescient, it was certainly detailed, well-written and well-reasoned (they present a section at the end detailing the many limitations of their observations that is nowadays hardly admitted in a question and answer session, let alone in the published paper!). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I spent an enjoyable couple hours reading this papers and composing this post. I'd love to hear suggestions of other interesting papers, comments on these papers, and really anything else natural history. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] This is of course, a sort of contrived analogy on my part, as they are taking a saltatory view - a mutant occurs in one generation in the Batesons' argument, though in my reading, they are taking a wider view in the introduction, even with the preceding "between one member and its immediate successor".</span></div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-16351125809338366462015-09-03T21:27:00.002-07:002015-09-03T21:27:57.833-07:00Fire, transpiration, local hydrology and some very happy sunflowers The Rocky fire swept through McLaughlin Reserve at the end of July. Nearly five weeks later, I resurveyed some sites that I went through the <a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2015/08/oops-my-field-site-disappeared-lessons.html" target="_blank">week after</a>. The amount of life that had survived in the completely wrecked sites was astonishing, as was the quick resprouting of some plants (<i>Rhamnus, Salix, Quercus</i>, <i>Vicia, Brassica, Asclepias</i>, etc.). But the most surprising thing was the "winners" of the fire. I've walked columbine this seep many times a week during the past two summers. This time, I was struck by how large several serpentine sunflowers (<i>Helianthus exilis</i>) and tumbling orache (<i>Atriplex rosea</i>) had become.<div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ukBHtXZa2PQ/Veir_JSoqKI/AAAAAAAACd4/P2rgndQ5s9g/s1600/aIMG_8445.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ukBHtXZa2PQ/Veir_JSoqKI/AAAAAAAACd4/P2rgndQ5s9g/s640/aIMG_8445.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Several stupendously super-sized serpentine sunflowers stoutly standing in foreground. A couple orache visible in the background.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Before the fire and all of last year, these were quite small plants, reaching maybe 1-2' tall with a couple dozen flowers. In many places, they end at 6-10" with just a few flowers. These plants were over 3' tall and each had a hundred or more flowers. What happened?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Last year there was a little bit of odd late-summer weather, with a few overcast cooler days (it is usually above 90 and not a cloud in the sky here). On those days, one very small seep that I had a columbine population in would fill up a couple tiny puddles that hadn't had water for months. After a couple times, I mentioned this to the reserve manager here and she pointed out that the plants around the seep don't transpire as much on cloudy days, so the water being put out by the seep was not being used up before it got to the ground. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
What transpires less than plants in overcast conditions? Dead plants. Right after the Rocky Fire, the seep with the sunflowers was flowing again big time (it is much larger and had much denser vegetation around it than the one that I could see the changes before). The amount of water in this seep now is greater than it's been since April or so. While the sunflowers and Atriplex are past the end of the visible water in the seep by a few dozen yards, it is still flowing belowground and these are pretty much the first plants that would be getting any of that water, as all plants upstream are fried. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ocfeWNi0hJ4/VekXfouKOyI/AAAAAAAACeI/4IF9NXzgBo8/s1600/aIMG_8462.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ocfeWNi0hJ4/VekXfouKOyI/AAAAAAAACeI/4IF9NXzgBo8/s640/aIMG_8462.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This section had been completely dry for months before the plants stopped sucking up all of the water flow. Also note all the greenery. That is resprouting of <i>Aquilegia eximia</i>, <i>Stachys albens</i>, <i>Salix</i> sp. and a few grasses and sedges (you can fire me as your naturalist if you'd like - I have no idea what species are here). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
This was an cool and unexpected - though completely logical - thing to find in the aftermath of the fire. I'm sure its been described before, but it was really eye-opening to me to see how much water those plants were transpiring and just how much influence this had on the hydrology and the success of other plants far below them (it seems like asymmetric resource competition - the manzanita and willows above were dictating the reproductive potential of the sunflowers below).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-b7qvHOUwelA/VekavmdSNUI/AAAAAAAACeU/T1I_j-kO3TE/s1600/aIMG_8543.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-b7qvHOUwelA/VekavmdSNUI/AAAAAAAACeU/T1I_j-kO3TE/s640/aIMG_8543.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Something similar may have been happening to trigger this flowering of <i>Mimulus guttatus</i>, but I'm a bit puzzled, as this was in a strange location for that to occur and nothing else around it was doing particularly well. It was certainly a pleasant surprise to see some spring-like color at the end of the summer!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
I'll write a longer post about the Jerusalem fire (more lost experiments... but not all!) and some other interesting observations that I've had during my last couple days of wanderings. But I've got more field work to do now. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zPAQnzYm6jQ/VekcWRfCOcI/AAAAAAAACeg/BpI0RxqvhfU/s1600/aIMG_8475.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="380" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zPAQnzYm6jQ/VekcWRfCOcI/AAAAAAAACeg/BpI0RxqvhfU/s640/aIMG_8475.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dragonflies were hanging out in the seep like nothing had changed. I believe this is <i>Aeshna walkeri </i>(common last year here and with the same gestalt), though I didn't have my net with me to confirm and I wouldn't have wanted to disturb her egg-laying anyway (I'm a bleeding heart when it comes to dragonflies... and snakes... and beetles... and others). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-78341103792480618252015-09-01T11:30:00.000-07:002015-09-01T11:30:21.562-07:00New paper: plant external chemical defenses!When I came to grad school, I was convinced I'd be working on plant-caterpillar-parasitoid relationships, with a focus on plant chemistry or biocontrol. I wrote my NSF-GRFP on the artichoke plume moth and several of its parasitoids. I spent a few months looking for plume moth caterpillars on thistles (a scratchy job) with relatively little success, though not for lack of trying. My focus then shifted to a cute little butterfly, <i>Brephidium exilis</i>, with strange population dynamics and then parasitoid sex ratios. All of these failed (either through logistical problems or me half-assing them because they just weren't that interesting to me).<br />
<div>
<br />
And then I happened onto <i>Blitum</i> (=<i>Chenopodium</i>) <i>californicum</i> at Bodega and my research took an unexpected turn. As I describe<a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2013/12/chenopod-salt-bladders.html" target="_blank"> here</a>, I was fascinated by the little fluid-filled pockets on leaf surfaces. I ran a number of small tests and found a defensive function of the bladders (probably one of many, many functions) and wrote it up and it was<a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00442-013-2827-0" target="_blank"> quickly published in <i>Oecologia</i></a>, a good journal. This being the very beginning of my second year of grad school (fall 2013), I was pretty jazzed. My committee, however, thought that I should be working on "the bigger picture". And so the ideas for <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.12212/abstract" target="_blank">this new paper</a> on external plant defenses came about.<br />
<br />
Writing this paper was WAY harder than I thought it was going to be. Instead of a formulaic paper, here's why I did the study (intro), here's how I did it (m&m's), here's what I found (results) and here's why its important (discussion), I was faced with a blank slate. <i>I could write this however I wanted </i>and that was a bit daunting. Primary and secondary school taught me how to write a coherent 3-5 paragraph essay, secondary school and college taught me how to write a term paper and college and grad school have taught me how to write a scientific paper, but no one taught me how to write a synthesis/idea/review paper. I'm glad I did it, though I think it will be a few years before I start on another paper like this.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span id="goog_1662827084"></span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-G2EKeu3ZGDw/VeXsGf5nBiI/AAAAAAAACdE/sSVcmPCV-uQ/s1600/smallglandularcaterpillar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-G2EKeu3ZGDw/VeXsGf5nBiI/AAAAAAAACdE/sSVcmPCV-uQ/s640/smallglandularcaterpillar.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This caterpillar (an unidentified pterophorid) lives on a plant (<i>Hemizonia congesta</i>) with lots of glandular trichomes, the factories of many external defensive chemicals. It blends in nicely with its "glandular trichomes". </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Taking Rick's lab motto, a Buckminster Fuller quote - "dare to be naive" - to heart, I started by thinking of what ecological differences would occur if a defensive plant chemical was situated on the plant surface instead of inside plant tissues. I came up with five basic differences between chemicals on the surface of plants (external chemical defenses: ECDs) and those inside plant tissues (internal chemical defenses: ICDs):<br />
<br />
(1) they are in direct contact with the abiotic environment;<br />
(2) they are not in direct contact with plant tissues apart from the cuticle;<br />
(3) they are first contacted by the vast majority of interacting organisms;<br />
(4) they may contact more than just the feeding and digestive parts of interacting organisms;<br />
(5) they are secreted from specialized structures or cells (or derived from a secretion thereof).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_dPTMkeV6F4/VeXsnkH2ybI/AAAAAAAACdM/uXi15iD4wHU/s1600/mayflyoncolumbine.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_dPTMkeV6F4/VeXsnkH2ybI/AAAAAAAACdM/uXi15iD4wHU/s640/mayflyoncolumbine.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">As discussed in a prior post, glandular exudates are often sticky and can have cool tritrophic effects. Here is a mayfly (Ephemeroptera) stuck on serpentine columbine (<i>Aquilegia eximia</i>). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I then took this list and delved into the literature, reading hundreds of papers on plant chemical defenses over a several month period (I cited 180 in the final paper, but probably skimmed or read abstracts of twice that number). While external chemical defenses had not been formalized as a class, many wonderful studies had investigated plants with ECDs and I was able to find many examples both in terrestrial systems and in marine alga. I wrote up a massive tome - over 18,000 words - with carefully detailed natural history of many of the studied systems. Of course, this was not publishable, though I was proud of it (I like nothing more than to put cool natural history into an ecology/evolution framework). I worked and worked on cutting it down to its basics. In the process, I found more references and presented it at ESA last year, getting some more feedback. The process dragged on and I got more and more interested in doing experiments and less and less interested in this mammoth synthesis paper. I submitted it a couple times in various stages of cutting and was basically told it was too long. So after this past field season, I sat down for a couple weeks with no other distractions and made it into a far more focused paper, which I submitted to <i>Biological Reviews</i>, as it was still a bit long for most other journals. Fortunately, it was accepted with helpful reviews and after tossing a few minor points back and forth with the editor, it is <a href="http://www.ericflopresti.com/uploads/4/0/6/1/40619833/lopresti_2015.pdf" target="_blank">now out for you to read</a>!<br />
<br />
Without getting into the specifics (you can read them in the paper, if you so choose), I found that many chemicals are on plant surfaces, many of these chemicals are defensive, and these may be systematically different from internal chemical defenses in the ways I hypothesized. This paper is important for three reasons: 1) hundreds of papers are published on plant chemistry and plant chemical ecology each year, but it is ecologically important where certain chemicals are located; 2) we have a rich body of theory on plant chemical defenses, but some parts of it are rather untested, and ECDs may allow some tests of certain theories (e.g. optimal defense theory) and; 3) many important crop plants have external defenses, which are easily manipulable in many cases, and it may be useful to think about them in this way to come up with better pest management schemes.<br />
<br />
I'm really curious about how this paper and this new classification scheme is received. Am I just cluttering the literature with new terms, or are these ecological differences informative and useful? We will see!<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_xxUoB6gSOo/VeXtQD2so4I/AAAAAAAACdY/Ky-Ch0ZJI-4/s1600/IMG_8092.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_xxUoB6gSOo/VeXtQD2so4I/AAAAAAAACdY/Ky-Ch0ZJI-4/s640/IMG_8092.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Castilleja minor</i>, a species of paintbrush and a hemiparasite, has really cool oily exudates. The pictured caterpillar, possibly an <i>Autographa</i> (?) species, seems undeterred, though it does mostly eat the insides of the flowers and fruit, which may avoid the exudates. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-57077718543942336982015-08-09T22:29:00.000-07:002015-08-09T22:29:12.556-07:00Oops, my field site disappeared: lessons learned from the Rocky Fire<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Last week, on the 29th, I was coming back in after a day in the field at the UC-Davis McLaughlin Reserve (in Lake County, CA) where I do all my work. I was setting up some insects in containers in the building when some one from next door came over to point out a smoke plume rising NW of the reserve.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T0Hj2bFcns4/VcaHlViThNI/AAAAAAAACUE/bw4CtfL6JtY/s1600/aIMG_6733.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T0Hj2bFcns4/VcaHlViThNI/AAAAAAAACUE/bw4CtfL6JtY/s640/aIMG_6733.jpg" width="424" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I wonder if this is the first photo of the Rocky Fire... it was taken at either 4:01 PM, Cal Fire says it started at 3:29, a few miles NW of the reserve. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Within a few minutes, it was obvious that this wasn't going to be like the other, smaller fires that were put out quickly the week before in the same area. I continued doing my work and made dinner. I wasn't particularly concerned, since the wind was pushing towards the fire and the plume was making its way away. By nightfall, it got worse, and the wind began to shift.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYWY8MtAo6JMG3IacnuC86B4c4SPlVs8MpQxSie621qg4w677ghiqBDk8nbJSeJknmGxklVfs8cHhOxHaAhJP6ujlHXvI7mbackf_lNsJNNDKT0-cEtMzn5I-OdzpCJhhsj2-UC8Ru9ZTa/s1600/aIMG_6764.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYWY8MtAo6JMG3IacnuC86B4c4SPlVs8MpQxSie621qg4w677ghiqBDk8nbJSeJknmGxklVfs8cHhOxHaAhJP6ujlHXvI7mbackf_lNsJNNDKT0-cEtMzn5I-OdzpCJhhsj2-UC8Ru9ZTa/s640/aIMG_6764.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">7:57 PM and the smoke plume still moving away from us. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
At this time, I went next door to the mining building to hang out with the safety guy there, who was on site in case this caused any problems for them. By 10ish, the power had gone out, the wind had come around and there was smoke and a small amount of ash falling. By 11, CalFire had shown up and told us it had jumped the road and that we were going to be evacuated soon. I packed up a few clothes, my bug nets, computer and a little bit of food and was on the road by midnight and back in Davis a little before 3 AM (nearly hitting a deer in the process). I fully expected to be back in a day or two. I had planned to stay there for a couple weeks - my longest continuous trip of the summer - as both the tarweeds and the columbines are in the middle of their season in late July/early August.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BUkLrRkWNQg/VcaK8vgHKgI/AAAAAAAACUc/MGLAhZ7LUg0/s1600/aIMG_0269.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BUkLrRkWNQg/VcaK8vgHKgI/AAAAAAAACUc/MGLAhZ7LUg0/s640/aIMG_0269.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Navarretia mellita</i>, the subject of one of my experiments, which was going along swimmingly before I left. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
After the evacuation and my near deer miss, I was running on a bit of adrenaline... I got to sleep by 4 AM or so and was up again by seven. And I spent the better part of the following week that I was evacuated refreshing the CalFire website as the fire grew in waves until nearly 70,000 acres (that is ~110 square miles). My sites all lay pretty much on the fire perimeter - I had no idea what to expect until I got back, as I knew that fires burned patchily.<br />
<br />
Doing small-scale insect-plant interactions, I do my experiments on a plant-scale - manipulating traits of one plant, and I mostly work on annuals and all on a yearly basis (which means I can't do a pre-/post-fire comparison). I do many experiments each season - this year I was running 7 at the time of the fire - all in the northern and western parts of the reserve, where the fire was most intense. So my heart was racing the whole trip back, when I was allowed in on Thursday (the 6th - over a week after evacuation). I dropped some refrigerated stuff off and quickly hurried out to my sites...<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cmGgSYWxtFE/VcaM8n15igI/AAAAAAAACUo/E0Cz3KgSVbo/s1600/aIMG_6789.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cmGgSYWxtFE/VcaM8n15igI/AAAAAAAACUo/E0Cz3KgSVbo/s640/aIMG_6789.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is the wet meadow where my <a href="http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/15-0342.1" target="_blank">recently published e</a>xperiment took place and where I had another experiment going this year. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
As I drove in to my columbine experiment, I knew it wasn't going to be a pretty sight. You can still see a streambed on the left side. Surrounding it was a nice population of serpentine columbine (<i>Aquilegia eximia</i>), hedge-nettle (<i>Stachys albens</i>) and common monkeyflower (<i>Mimulus guttatus</i>) with a scattered coffeeberrry (<i>Rhamnus</i> sp.) and willow (<i>Salix</i> sp.), bordered by THICK chaparral (manzanitas, oaks, chamise, etc.). I did find remnants of the experiment...<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YTMJVn3Kpww/VcaOYzYtqaI/AAAAAAAACU0/OdjaKooq79E/s1600/aIMG_6794.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YTMJVn3Kpww/VcaOYzYtqaI/AAAAAAAACU0/OdjaKooq79E/s640/aIMG_6794.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I should have bought the pin flags rated for raging-wildfire temperatures. Next time. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
My next experiment was through a tiny circuitous trail which I had carefully machete hacked earlier in the season through manzanita and cypress. It involved going over and under a number of logs and around small breaks in the chaparral. Yesterday I could walk (and see) in a straight line through a whole lot of nothing. All I found was a tiny bit of melted flagging tape, attached to a columbine stalk that had somehow escaped total incineration...<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8PJk5MgPPEY/VcaQg-OTL9I/AAAAAAAACVI/HYT1ed77fqs/s1600/aIMG_6824.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8PJk5MgPPEY/VcaQg-OTL9I/AAAAAAAACVI/HYT1ed77fqs/s640/aIMG_6824.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Based on its location (and most of my landmark shrubs were gone), I think this was control #50. It formerly was under a manzanita. I found it in the middle of a large, barren field. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
All was not lost, however! My next project was a huge set of experiments examining defensive induction in a tarweed, <i>Hemizonia congesta</i> (this specific epitaph is accurate, at least for me). Fire fighters had made a dozer line through the upper end of this field between two roads. The flames reached the two roads and the firebreak, but fortunately never jumped and my site (containing 250 plants which I had been following for months), ~200 meters beyond, remained intact. I was a bit worried that perhaps the insects would have been affected, but the insect communities seemed normal in abundance and identity.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-q98HP8MwzVE/VcaSOJRkKVI/AAAAAAAACVU/3R5wcjTcuKk/s1600/aIMG_6949.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-q98HP8MwzVE/VcaSOJRkKVI/AAAAAAAACVU/3R5wcjTcuKk/s640/aIMG_6949.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">My site is on the middle hump in the mid-ground. You can see the sparse vegetation on those serpentine barrens compared to the field of<i> Avena</i> in the non-serpentine areas. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The grasslands were wild to walk around. Grass fires don't burn as hot nor for as long as chaparral fires, so some things survived. Not among those surviving were the rabbit-poop looking burnt star thistle flowers and fruit.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--os90i3Y7jg/VcaTKz7vWPI/AAAAAAAACVc/BnhC4WXAtQE/s1600/aIMG_6940.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--os90i3Y7jg/VcaTKz7vWPI/AAAAAAAACVc/BnhC4WXAtQE/s640/aIMG_6940.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It burned the spines right off the thistle flowers. And it looked like most hadn't seeded... hooray!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QNs9kpoOcsk/VcaTnlaHzgI/AAAAAAAACVk/6UvPYPMV2gw/s1600/aIMG_6935.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QNs9kpoOcsk/VcaTnlaHzgI/AAAAAAAACVk/6UvPYPMV2gw/s640/aIMG_6935.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The living stuff on the right is a variety of tarweeds (<i>Hemizonia, Holocarpha </i>and <i>Calycedinia </i>spp.) growing on a serpentine barren (low biomass). The burned area on the left was <i>Avena </i>and star thistle and had much higher biomass and apparently burns better. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4N_vlF7EyF4/VcaURPZ7jmI/AAAAAAAACVs/RkI8JIY2dKA/s1600/aIMG_6938.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4N_vlF7EyF4/VcaURPZ7jmI/AAAAAAAACVs/RkI8JIY2dKA/s640/aIMG_6938.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Like the wicked witch of the west when confronted with water, milkweeds (this is <i>Asclepias eriocarpa</i>) apparently just melt in the face of fire. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-W8WUUEydEbY/VcaVHOLg2vI/AAAAAAAACV0/h01YuMfG1ic/s1600/aIMG_6914.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-W8WUUEydEbY/VcaVHOLg2vI/AAAAAAAACV0/h01YuMfG1ic/s640/aIMG_6914.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Not all the milkeeds melted, fortunately for this large monarch caterpillar (and the orange oleander aphids out of focus in the foreground). There were a bunch on a small surviving patch of <i>Asclepias fascicularis</i> which was no more than 2 meters from completely scorched earth. I wonder whether they emigrated here from melted plants or if they were all on the one patch to begin with.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The grassy areas had tons of Mourning Doves. More than I've ever seen at one time in my life. Did they group up after the fire and emigrate right to my field site? I don't have a clue. I usually see them near <i>Croton</i> (<i>Eremocarpus</i>) <i>setigerus</i>, but that's not around this site - I wonder if they were eating burned thistle heads or other seeds exposed by the burning of all the grass. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hQuqEkxatUQ/VcaXFVjIrUI/AAAAAAAACWA/AHGA7EJK5-4/s1600/aIMG_6883.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hQuqEkxatUQ/VcaXFVjIrUI/AAAAAAAACWA/AHGA7EJK5-4/s640/aIMG_6883.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The patchiness of the fire on a microscale was crazy. Here a small patch of seeding <i>Mimulus nudatus</i> (a rare California endemic found only in serpentine soils in a small part of the northern coast range) stands amidst a scorched landscape. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Another set of experiments I had were also very close to a burned area, but they too, were spared. I was studying the ecology of two sticky species: <i>Navarretia mellita</i> and <i>Madia elegans</i>. Both are weedy species that love disturbance. There is an old road above the center that is drive-able, but rarely driven and hosts nice populations of both species that like the roadside disturbance. The <i>Navarretia</i> experiment was pretty much fine, being about 5 yards from the road. In the couple weeks that I hadn't checked it, some of the seeds had dehisced, but I had final inflorescence number for all the plants, which is enough of a fitness proxy for my purposes.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bZgYmbL5s0s/VcbbzjUgv5I/AAAAAAAACWc/BKMxHKKGNgY/s1600/aIMG_6772.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bZgYmbL5s0s/VcbbzjUgv5I/AAAAAAAACWc/BKMxHKKGNgY/s640/aIMG_6772.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Big flags, little tiny plants.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The tarweed (<i>Madia elegans</i>), on the other hand, suffered a little bit. During the fire, trucks must have driven by that site hundreds and hundreds of times... I was there for the afternoon yesterday and had 4 or 5 cars drive by twice each (it is a dead-end) - and that was long after the fire was out in that section. Tarweeds are sticky and I was manipulating the amount of insects they caught (following up on Billy and Ian's <i>Madia</i> study and my columbine study). Most of the plants were within a yard of the road edge (non were on the road - none got hit), but with the hundreds of vehicle passes the amount of dirt kicked up and subsequently caught by the tarweeds was crazy. The treatments - varying amounts of dead fruit flies - were sort-of intact, but redoing the treatments was a major trial, as the fruit flies wouldn't stick. This will get better as they grow and they ought to flower for another month or so, so perhaps this won't be a complete wash... we'll see.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KcscjKqoKjo/Vcbcw1Zij7I/AAAAAAAACWk/Dif1K-8CMuI/s1600/aIMG_6997.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KcscjKqoKjo/Vcbcw1Zij7I/AAAAAAAACWk/Dif1K-8CMuI/s640/aIMG_6997.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Its hard to see in this picture, but pretty much every glandular trichome on the plant had dust stuck to it, rendering it pretty much completely unsticky. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The last experiment, a manzanita fruit manipulation, had pretty much been doomed from the get-go. I started the experiment early in the season, when the plants thought they had lots of water, but soon after, they aborted all the fruit I had in the experiment. So I moved to a new site, on the edge of a pond, where the shrubs were a little bit happier, but I started it too late (as I was still nursing the first try along a little bit). The fire left only one of those manzanitas standing at all as it whipped around the pond. Not a huge loss, though it would have been nice to get the last set of data.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H0iBCOiuYYc/VcbeHXXt_HI/AAAAAAAACWw/FT4gsqAM4Ss/s1600/aIMG_7024.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H0iBCOiuYYc/VcbeHXXt_HI/AAAAAAAACWw/FT4gsqAM4Ss/s640/aIMG_7024.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A dead deer in the pond that the manzanitas were next to. I don't know for sure that this was fire related, but it seems likely as the chaparral up to this pond on three sides was burned completely for hundreds and hundreds of meters. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In the pond, besides the dead deer pictured above, life seemed to go on fine. The tule and cattails were intact, as good, water-filled greenery should be. Pied-billed grebes continued to feed streaky little babies and coot made all their funny noises. I finally saw the first Ruddy Duck baby of the year - in years past there have been quite a few in this pond and this year there were quite a few pairs, but only one duckling seems to have come out. A Gadwall nest that I found a few weeks back should have hatched (or been preyed upon by coyotes, raccoons, etc., by now) and a few rather large babies were around the pond, along with the first Green-winged Teal of the season. Tiger beetles ran on the shores and dragonflies flitted by, as if nothing had happened.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEju9F6ZrYWvAuVG1zchjhlURhX_Zph3LnHm9wdkjz0Rxcm3qEO4ABFjT1qtchWQVCGR8L4INMfc3AV0vo_NbSHIDIjBmuPiGLem50sr-uYL1IFVHzAv2nTKzrTDrjva_wRp-hSqFTA8eM7p/s1600/aIMG_7009.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEju9F6ZrYWvAuVG1zchjhlURhX_Zph3LnHm9wdkjz0Rxcm3qEO4ABFjT1qtchWQVCGR8L4INMfc3AV0vo_NbSHIDIjBmuPiGLem50sr-uYL1IFVHzAv2nTKzrTDrjva_wRp-hSqFTA8eM7p/s640/aIMG_7009.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'm not sure where this jackrabbit fled during the fire, but he's a survivor for sure - there wasn't much unparched in the area that I found him. There were a good number of these around - and strikingly, in a lone patch of<i> Garrya</i>, with literally nothing for hundreds of yards around, a chipmunk scolded me!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ia7E22HRmv8/VcbgFTu4hgI/AAAAAAAACXE/XJS5cSsetBw/s1600/aIMG_7019.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ia7E22HRmv8/VcbgFTu4hgI/AAAAAAAACXE/XJS5cSsetBw/s640/aIMG_7019.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Other folks lost experiments as well. This was a bird exclosure, under which was a chamise that had been monitored for years. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The amount of life around, even in burned areas just a week later was astounding. While exploring, I heard a pair of Rufous-Crowned Sparrows chipping from a couple mostly demolished manzanitas along a completely devegetated streambed. They popped out to check me out - I suspect that most territorial animals are dealing with a lot of stragglers coming by. I had a secondhand report of a mountain lion wandering down a road near fire crews in the middle of the day - not a typical behavior. While watching sandpipers, I heard a barking, like that of a large dog coming from near where my truck was parked. Thinking it might be a lost dog displaced by the fire, I headed towards it. As I neared the truck, on a rock above it was a coyote, looking down at me and barking like hell. As I fumbled in my backpack for my camera, he ducked behind the rock and continued berating me until I left. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Uu_8qSdTSBw/Vcbhw73HiiI/AAAAAAAACXQ/DUkZ0FVaVAE/s1600/aIMG_7077.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Uu_8qSdTSBw/Vcbhw73HiiI/AAAAAAAACXQ/DUkZ0FVaVAE/s640/aIMG_7077.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Walking through dense manzanita chaparral is miserable. Walking through the same area now is quite easy.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6JPVCaDC5sU/VcbiLIhWabI/AAAAAAAACXY/St1ug86Nao0/s1600/aIMG_7114.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6JPVCaDC5sU/VcbiLIhWabI/AAAAAAAACXY/St1ug86Nao0/s640/aIMG_7114.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Though it makes you quite dirty. This was after only about 10 minutes. After an afternoon of hiking around, I looked like a coal miner.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
For a number of reasons, I spend a bit of time looking at spiders: they are important predators on many plants, I've worked on crab spider behavior, and much of the Bahamian island research revolves around them. One of the first signs of life in the fire area was funnel web spider (Agelenidae) webs, which are a thick mat of webbing with hole the size of a nickel or so (like a funnel, as the name suggests). There were tons of them on top of the blacked dirt and vegetation.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QdECNHfIpCU/Vcbjw-eNT0I/AAAAAAAACXk/vcmkP-NvrQE/s1600/aIMG_7098.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QdECNHfIpCU/Vcbjw-eNT0I/AAAAAAAACXk/vcmkP-NvrQE/s640/aIMG_7098.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A nice clean, fresh, funnel web on top of blackened soil. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
In contrast, in non-burned areas, the webs were messy with ash that was clearly flying in large quantities with the fire nearby. I wondered why the spiders hadn't spun a new web or cleaned it out. I suspect that the reason has to do with how costly spider silk is to the spider. Being made of protein and laid out carefully, it is both nutritionally costly and time-intensive to make a web. Many spiders eat their webs if they take them down and there is even a group of parasitic spiders which eat the webs that other spiders make (!!!).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FCsh19Zb4X0/VcblReNcISI/AAAAAAAACXw/jJAnoLiTMGQ/s1600/aIMG_6912.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FCsh19Zb4X0/VcblReNcISI/AAAAAAAACXw/jJAnoLiTMGQ/s640/aIMG_6912.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A web with lots of entrapped ash. I think it is a theridiid, but I didn't look too closely. All the webs were covered like this.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtgANgHtMIro2MB5XBO-y85XEZ1mUHi7G_WOUv2vyqfObqip6Be4Wjogwrt-z1bTdI3KrgieZq4KApPoV0-xdJXCG_ivFzCOqWLhdmql4tTs147bBtKDhLHVp9Fqfiv6caoCc_hKbqhTSV/s1600/aIMG_7106.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtgANgHtMIro2MB5XBO-y85XEZ1mUHi7G_WOUv2vyqfObqip6Be4Wjogwrt-z1bTdI3KrgieZq4KApPoV0-xdJXCG_ivFzCOqWLhdmql4tTs147bBtKDhLHVp9Fqfiv6caoCc_hKbqhTSV/s640/aIMG_7106.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pocket gophers also survived, with fresh diggings in the 5 or so days since the fire passed through this area. I just saw my first pocket gopher a few weeks ago, while being acquainted with their diggings for years. They have really, really weird ears.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Its been a really interesting time to look at the natural history of this area. The next few years, while I continue my phd, will also be an interesting time of watching fire-following plants, resprouters and who knows what else.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qTcfjeh5ol4/Vcbn1oZS_SI/AAAAAAAACYM/nIgp_We531c/s1600/aIMG_6848.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qTcfjeh5ol4/Vcbn1oZS_SI/AAAAAAAACYM/nIgp_We531c/s640/aIMG_6848.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The fire opened up previously hidden scenes from dense chaparral, like this midden. I guess this was from when there was a nearby shale quarry operating, but I'm not sure. Those beer cans look old...<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
AND THEN...<br />
<br />
I wrote most of this the night of 8/8/15. About 4 PM today (8/9/15), another call came on the radio about a smoke plume. I hurried outside and shit... another BIG fire, within a couple miles, this time SW of the station. This one has been termed the Jerusalem fire. I hurried and collected some seeds for a friend and reconned some badly dozered sections in the SE portion of the reserve.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hHZR1ucibI4/Vcgv_Zya6KI/AAAAAAAACYs/GuamCPIgr3k/s1600/aIMG_7245.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hHZR1ucibI4/Vcgv_Zya6KI/AAAAAAAACYs/GuamCPIgr3k/s640/aIMG_7245.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jerusalem fire, ~4:30 PM, 8/9/15. If the twittosphere is to be believed, those two plumes are from two separate arson fires.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Vi1_s6Soigc/VcgwgvbbAMI/AAAAAAAACY0/MBi823Am2gw/s1600/aIMG_7300.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Vi1_s6Soigc/VcgwgvbbAMI/AAAAAAAACY0/MBi823Am2gw/s640/aIMG_7300.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">These dozer lines are ridiculous. There are at least 4 (and a road) between this particular one and anywhere the Rocky fire actually burned. They tore the shit out of some really nice oak woodland habitat and compacted soil, etc. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yveiCDQk7Io/VcgxZZIlIXI/AAAAAAAACZQ/Cpy_2OC9W0o/s1600/aIMG_7317.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yveiCDQk7Io/VcgxZZIlIXI/AAAAAAAACZQ/Cpy_2OC9W0o/s640/aIMG_7317.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Fire haze does produce extremely beautiful light.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ae7Vxdg9Noo/VcgxEdAUXAI/AAAAAAAACY8/wk2suSakUvI/s1600/aIMG_7306.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ae7Vxdg9Noo/VcgxEdAUXAI/AAAAAAAACY8/wk2suSakUvI/s640/aIMG_7306.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This charred live oak (?) leaf was one of many which rained down during my hike... the fire was 3-5 miles away at this point.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBIYGFSpd00/VcgxY4rddaI/AAAAAAAACZM/eF8Sqpd00t4/s1600/aIMG_7330.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBIYGFSpd00/VcgxY4rddaI/AAAAAAAACZM/eF8Sqpd00t4/s640/aIMG_7330.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Like ecologists, firefighters seem to like to put flagging tape on anything interesting. Here on abandoned machinery. Its also on gates, fences, various poles, etc. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fUPbKYlvDt8/VcgxYPPjmEI/AAAAAAAACZE/VeSdfoKoNrA/s1600/aIMG_7443.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fUPbKYlvDt8/VcgxYPPjmEI/AAAAAAAACZE/VeSdfoKoNrA/s640/aIMG_7443.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A constant part of the wildlife now, these big birds are really thirsty, sometimes drinking 3,000 gallons every few minutes. I'm getting better at my identification of these. I think this is a Boeing 234 "Chinook", but these two rotor helicopters seem almost as confusing as empid flycatchers... <a href="http://gacc.nifc.gov/swcc/dc/azpdc/operations/documents/aircraft/links/Aircraft%20Recognition%20Guide.pdf" target="_blank">field guide.here</a>. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
We'll see how this one pans out... I'm not particularly worried for my experiments now. If they burn, they burn but there is a lot of burned area between this one and them (it is continuous, but the fire would need to turn a couple different ways before it got to anything).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H40C2RNBAic/Vcg0tvtt2_I/AAAAAAAACZ4/G5Q3eUl2uck/s1600/aIMG_7416.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H40C2RNBAic/Vcg0tvtt2_I/AAAAAAAACZ4/G5Q3eUl2uck/s640/aIMG_7416.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The pond this CH-47 just refilled from is part of the complex where the field component of <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00442-013-2827-0" target="_blank">this paper</a> took place. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
I did learn some field season lessons, as well.<br />
<br />
Things I will do differently next summer:<br />
<br />
1) Space my experiments out farther! The farther apart they are, the more likely a fire line will go between them in case something like this happens again.<br />
2) Put them a little farther back from roads (this also would protect against accidental drive-overs).<br />
3) Put them in a matrix of previously burned areas. Its hard to reburn the same areas two years in a row (though the Wragg fire managed that this year in Yolo/Solano counties!). That will allow a little extra safety.<br />
<br />
And finally - while I lost some work (a couple months on a couple projects), I'll certainly be able to repeat those next year and I'll get a couple completed experiments from the seaon. Thankfully, I didn't lose my house, my pets, my vehicles or my livelihood - others did.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IrTEa5UAP3M/Vcbm8Mz2FkI/AAAAAAAACYE/AbpG49i7Gmw/s1600/aIMG_7085.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IrTEa5UAP3M/Vcbm8Mz2FkI/AAAAAAAACYE/AbpG49i7Gmw/s640/aIMG_7085.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A lone manzanita looks out over a burned land. The road you can see in the back right is Roundtop road, in Knoxville Recreation area. It would be a good place to check this out from (but do not, under any circumstances, camp in the campground there). I guess the area to the right all has already/will burn in the Jerusalem fire, too. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-9264603069407132592015-07-22T14:22:00.001-07:002015-07-22T14:22:14.268-07:00Sticky plant attraction, a new paperI could not possibly do as good a job as <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/inkfish/2015/07/21/plants-murder-bugs-to-pay-their-bodyguards/#.VbABtPlVhHw" target="_blank">the summary of this paper written by Elizabeth Preston, here</a>, so I'll first tell the backstory - and when it comes out, I'll detail another cool part of it (which is not in the preprint version - instead buried in the appendices).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7tAg0x51rnU/VbABa4HM8KI/AAAAAAAACQ4/y8VZj_l9jkU/s1600/cat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7tAg0x51rnU/VbABa4HM8KI/AAAAAAAACQ4/y8VZj_l9jkU/s640/cat.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Heliothis phloxiphaga</i> eating a flower bud of <i>Aquilegia eximia</i>, the serpentine or sticky columbine. Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Last summer, I spent most of my time studying <i>Trichostema laxum</i>, which I've written about in a previous <a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2015/01/beginning-research-floral-polymorphisms.html" target="_blank">post</a>. I was trying to test my hypothesis that external chemical defenses are easily washed away by rain (which may be driving the pattern that few are found in wet areas) and spent countless hours doing various pieces of this - observing pollinators (the volatiles washed off might affect pollination positively or negatively), counting insects, leaves, buds, flowers and seeds (which can be done <i>in situ</i>!) and by July, the drought and some jackrabbits made this experiment look rather grim. I still haven't brought myself to analyze these data, as it ended so depressingly...<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vdta5PRdsNo/Va__uTDMlrI/AAAAAAAACQo/xAm2aW1JQLE/s1600/IMG_9868.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="425" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vdta5PRdsNo/Va__uTDMlrI/AAAAAAAACQo/xAm2aW1JQLE/s640/IMG_9868.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">As the floral color polymorphism was not in the experimental population, I didn't notice it until the end of the summer, and gathered some, but not enough, data on it. Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I was getting a little frustrated and I wandered around, naturalizing, which is always a remedy for frustration (to me at least). I came upon a columbine - <i>Aquilegia eximia</i> - which I instantly knew held some potential for cool experiments. The first thing I noticed was that it was extremely sticky and covered in dead insects and the second was that it had a bunch of predators on it. I immediately thought to Billy Krimmel and Ian Pearse's cool paper on tarweeds (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12032/pdf" target="_blank">doi:10.1111/ele.12032</a>) , in which they demonstrated that the dead insects provided food for predators, which protected the plant from herbivores. I figured initially that I would simply test this in another system.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1_D8n3Xd368/VbADDx2PK5I/AAAAAAAACRE/KrTm5kGvR7g/s1600/hopnymph2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1_D8n3Xd368/VbADDx2PK5I/AAAAAAAACRE/KrTm5kGvR7g/s640/hopnymph2.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A <i>Hoplinus</i> nymph (probably the most important predator in the system) approaches an <br />entrapped fly.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Because I was out in the field without access to a genetics lab to get dead flies, I couldn't replicate their design - where they added dead fruit flies to plants to supplement carrion - so instead I removed all the carrion from half of my 50 plants, hypothesizing that I would get a decrease in predators and an increase in herbivory (which we did!). I also thought hard about what else to test to add to Billy and Ian's work. I thought that, perhaps, it would be interesting to test whether the plants attracted the various entrapped insects (mostly small flies, wasps and beetles) somehow. Lots of plants attract insects - pollinators are the most obvious, but volatile signals attract predators, other herbivores and even birds (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12177/abstract" target="_blank">doi: 10.1111/ele.12177</a>)<span style="font-family: sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 12.3581237792969px; white-space: pre;">. </span></span>Having petri dishes, plastic mesh and tanglefoot in my field kit - I made little sticky traps, with a sticky mesh top and a petri dish bottom and I put either columbine stems and leaves (a very small amount) or nothing in them. Collecting them 24 hours later, I found that the dishes with columbine had higher insects than the empty ones (which would demonstrate the ambient rate of insects landing on these traps). The trapped insects were also little flies, wasps and beetles, just like on the plants themselves.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1099_v3xNzo/VbAFidbHWQI/AAAAAAAACRQ/Ts7vPrLbJoE/s1600/IMG_0770.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1099_v3xNzo/VbAFidbHWQI/AAAAAAAACRQ/Ts7vPrLbJoE/s640/IMG_0770.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dead Hymenoptera on columbine (I may be giving up entomologist credentials, but I am not sure whether it is a wasp or an ant alate).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
So this became a story - perhaps logically - that the plants were somehow attracting insects to kill and feed to the beneficial predators on their surfaces (retaining their services). I presented this work in a talk at a little student conference at Davis during recruitment weekend and played with several ways to frame the story. The first was to be rather dry - columbines attract insects and control a tritrophic defense (or something along those lines). Instead, I thought long and hard about trying to make a metaphor (socialism - a worker's paradise for the predatory bugs or a Roman bread and circus type thing, but they didn't really work) and while I don't remember how I came up with this - I settled on the <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/lcr/fsca/fsca67.htm" target="_blank">sirens, figures of classical mythology who lured sailors to their deaths</a>. I therefore framed it as these poor insects - innocent sailors of the California air - are somehow drawn to their deaths on the columbines. Of course, the columbines put the insects to good use in their defense, leaving open the question - which I am sure classical mythologists lose much sleep over - what did the sirens do with their collection of dead sailors?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7aDotBj_aXw/VbAHdyyBNdI/AAAAAAAACRc/80Y9ZaG1j8I/s1600/IMG_9251.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7aDotBj_aXw/VbAHdyyBNdI/AAAAAAAACRc/80Y9ZaG1j8I/s640/IMG_9251.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Serpentine columbines in flower. Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a href="http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/15-0342.1?af=R" target="_blank">Read more here!</a><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Helvetica Neu', Helvetica, 'Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans', 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">Eric F. LoPresti, Ian Seth Pearse, and Grace K. Charles </span><i style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Helvetica Neu', Helvetica, 'Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans', 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">In press.</i><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Helvetica Neu', Helvetica, 'Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans', 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"> The siren song of a sticky plant: columbines provision mutualist arthropods by attracting and killing passerby insects. Ecology. </span><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/15-0342.1" style="background-color: white; color: #000099; font-family: 'Helvetica Neu', Helvetica, 'Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans', 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/15-0342.1</a><br />
<br />Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-55850862555413268302015-05-12T14:06:00.001-07:002015-05-12T14:06:40.787-07:00External Chemical Defenses; a natural history viewAfter a long hiatus (due to qualifying exams, a dissertation proposal, hundreds of <i>Trichostema </i>in the greenhouse and a couple manuscripts in progress), here is the long-awaited (by likely my parents, grandparents, and maybe 3 other people) blog post that outlines THE TOPIC OF MY DISSERTATION (in a rather digressive way). I took a long and circuitous route to find this topic, but its very exciting to me and when I've presented it publicly (<a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2014/08/esa2014-preview-external-chemical.html" target="_blank">at Ecological Society of America meeting last August</a> and informally to many colleagues), it has been greeted with interest. This post will mostly deal with how I got to this topic and why it is a great thing for insect-plant biology, a later one will detail the implications (a paper on which was recently accepted!).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dnpbXicZPfg/VVJbS__LfDI/AAAAAAAACHE/T_iIHL2vNX4/s1600/1140.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="424" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dnpbXicZPfg/VVJbS__LfDI/AAAAAAAACHE/T_iIHL2vNX4/s640/1140.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">The stem of </span><i style="font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">Trichostema laxum</i><span style="font-size: 12.8000001907349px;"> (Lamiaceae). The little bubbles on the tips of the glandular trichomes are full of an oily, wonderfully vinegary-smelling fluid, of unknown utility.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Coming from the northeast and botanizing and entomologizing in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, I knew my fair share of plants - herbs and trees, shrubs and aquatic plants - and many of their associated insects. Coming to California, I was exposed to more. <u>A whole lot more!</u> I met a great deal of new taxa - from aromatic plains of sagebrush, to strange long-horned moths (<i>Adela</i>) to smooth barked manzanitas and madrones to the most spectacular diversity of wildflowers I've ever seen to albatrosses wheeling offshore. As a natural historian, I had a lot to learn and I continue to learn new plants, insects and even occasionally birds, each time I venture out to a new spot, and often when I revisit old spots.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img height="426" src="https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/l/t1.0-9/3394_966541056821_235492869_n.jpg?oh=254cb8b1f73aa53a5668f75dbe10a2cc&oe=55D6F136" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="640" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A Mormon cricket, <i>Anabrus simplex</i>. White Mountain, CA, Sept. 2012. A mind-blowingly large katydid.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In the first year, I bounced from project to project, trying to raise parasitoids from caterpillars, looking at galls and leaf miners for inspiration and tractable systems to look at the effects of plants and their chemistry on predators and parasitoids of the herbivores feeding on those plants. None of which really panned out individually, but I spent a lot of time wandering around with a net, hand lens and notebook. And I learned a lot of natural history of California, the coast, the coast range, the valley, and the west side of the Sierras, in the process.Then I happened upon the chenopod <i>Blitum californicum</i> and ended up spending a summer playing with various chenopod species and getting a <a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2013/12/chenopod-salt-bladders.html" target="_blank">paper</a> out of it. This, coupled with work done with Billy Krimmel and Ian Pearse (see their research <a href="http://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=9020" target="_blank">here</a>), got me thinking about plants really hard. And I realized a major difference between plants back home and here: plants back home are generally rather glabrous (smooth-surfaced) and here they have a myriad of glandular trichomes, general stickiness, oiliness, resins, etc. and they often have strong smells (the latter point is an oft-mentioned feature of plants of Mediterranean climates and why many of our kitchen spices - e.g. sage, rosemary, oregano - hail from these areas).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DEhyc_iuFno/VVJfxJZshoI/AAAAAAAACHQ/6LSU4wdp2aA/s1600/sticky.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DEhyc_iuFno/VVJfxJZshoI/AAAAAAAACHQ/6LSU4wdp2aA/s640/sticky.jpg" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The glandular trichomes on <i>Aquilegia eximia</i> (serpentine columbine: Ranunculaceae) <br />are extremely sticky and entrap enormous quantities of small flies and wasps.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So I spent more time seeking out these plants and examining them closely. I also spent time reading the literature on secretory tissues in plants. And I began to think, abstractly, what might the differences between compounds put onto plant surfaces and those inside a plant be? I made lists, I woke up in the middle of the night with ideas and eventually, I distilled these many ideas into five broad differences between the potentially-defensive chemical secretions and those sequested inside plant tissues. These form the meat of the accepted paper, to be detailed later. Instead I'll briefly touch on how I experiment with external chemicals and why this is important and exciting.<br />
<br />
The first approach I took to <i>playing with</i> (e.g. experimenting) external chemicals was testing their efficacy at preventing damage to plants. I did, and continue to do, this in two ways (in the chenopod paper as well as many small unpublished tests). The first way is to remove or reduce the defense, gently, using a paintbrush or a sponge, leaving the leaf surface intact. I then run choice or no choice (palatability) assays on these plants, usually using a the wonderfully generalist spotted cucumber beetle, which rarely fails to eat at least a little bit of a plant (but also will eat a LOT of a plant it likes). The second is to take the external chemical (either from the plant or the known chemical) and place it onto another plant, either in natural concentrations, or varying the concentrations, looking for changes in herbivory.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tlmPwLec5-A/VVJjHcveNTI/AAAAAAAACHg/l64E2YBUQ8I/s1600/unnamed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tlmPwLec5-A/VVJjHcveNTI/AAAAAAAACHg/l64E2YBUQ8I/s640/unnamed.jpg" width="360" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Lab-grown, highly glandular <i>Antirrhinum californicum</i>.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I also do this in the field - something that is really hard to mimic with internal chemicals. Removal of exudates from plants can be difficult (e.g. Yerba Santa, with really tough leaf resins), but can also be really easy, as in the case of <i>Antirrhinum californicum</i>, the California snapdragon. In the field, removing the exudates of this snapdragon caused a really interesting response: insects - mostly a heliothine noctuid, caused more damage to the exudate-removed plants,as expected; but mammals (deer and/or black-tailed jackrabbits) ate preferentially the plants with exudates intact (highly significant result). This suggests that the exudates may be both a defense and a liability in nature, an interesting result that wouldn't have been possible in a lab - and wouldn't have been easy to find with an internal defense, as manipulation would have been more difficult.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ah1f8_BIRZc/VVJkmSj2wAI/AAAAAAAACHs/UjyyDLobiwQ/s1600/IMG_7996.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ah1f8_BIRZc/VVJkmSj2wAI/AAAAAAAACHs/UjyyDLobiwQ/s640/IMG_7996.JPG" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Deer or jackrabbit eaten <i>A. californicum </i>from the experiment. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Why is this exciting? Well, a manipulation like this wouldn't really be possible with internal defenses. There are two general ways to look at the effect of internal chemical(s) on other organisms: (1) find or create lines that differ in concentrations of chemicals, or look comparatively across species that differ, or (2) create, via genetic techniques, knockout lines that lack a compound. The problem with both approaches is that there is pleitropy (one gene doing multiple things). If you have lines that differ in a compound, they also differ in other aspects. Similarly, if you have a gene knockout (or duplication), that will almost certainly have effects on other aspects of the plant. Of course, there are positives to both of those approaches: the comparative approach allows investigations on evolution of a trait and a genetic manipulation allows a level of integration and detail that no field study on a natural population will ever approach. In my systems, it seemed like a good way to get at defense mechanisms. But was I the first to do it? Absolutely not, in the marine world (Mark Hay's lab) have been doing these sorts of exudate removals on seaweeds for decades. Yet terrestrial folks don't cite these papers or think in quite the same way (the marine folks cite terrestrial chemical ecology all the time!). And even they weren't the first! Thomas Hartmann pointed out in a <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2290813/" target="_blank">2007 paper</a> on the history of plant-insect science, Ernst Stahl, in ~1900, removed the acid droplets secreted by evening primroses (<i>Oenothera</i> spp.) and found that the plants became far more palatable to herbivorous snails and slugs. However, despite the ease and history of these experiments, they are rare. And I'm not quite sure why.<br />
<br />
The most satisfying part of these investigations so far (more to be detailed soon) has been combining a variety of approaches to think about a problem. I've made lots of natural history observations (examined lots of plants with secretions), thought about problems in creative ways (can I think of fundamental differences between internal and external chemicals, ecologically?), read the literature (from Darwin and earlier, to the present), planned and ran experiments, interpreted data (with such strange results as in the snapdragons) and am working on integrating it all into a dissertation, which I hope - in a few years - will be a cohesive body of work that other people will add to, build upon and apply to new systems and problems.Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-75870723007932310812015-02-10T13:04:00.002-08:002015-02-10T13:04:31.097-08:00Lark Bunting, Solano CountyI got out this morning for some quick birding with Jay Riggio and Noah Reid. We were hoping to find Mountain Plovers, but had to settle for a nice Lark Bunting instead. We first spotted it foraging in with a flock of Lark Sparrows (another non-lark lark - but we did see the "real" lark - Horned Lark, too). I thought I was going to have to settle for this photo:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-EJEVQ6zYNRU/VNpxgql7AhI/AAAAAAAACAw/8t71105xgSg/s1600/larkb1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-EJEVQ6zYNRU/VNpxgql7AhI/AAAAAAAACAw/8t71105xgSg/s1600/larkb1.jpg" height="370" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
But fortunately it came closer. </div>
<div class="" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD39X54ROmUPyGbJ_ITdKy-A0so_mxlDH0ZiV-dlNZaqNgGtFgMrCiuXSZ_AwZHs-kXMp_t9hiqHGvH0omI-tt2th6xbD6dsO4-pRNVeyvcdQD-QPwwEusIIwCyhoq5kXEbZEPEK3K7Tdj/s1600/larkb3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD39X54ROmUPyGbJ_ITdKy-A0so_mxlDH0ZiV-dlNZaqNgGtFgMrCiuXSZ_AwZHs-kXMp_t9hiqHGvH0omI-tt2th6xbD6dsO4-pRNVeyvcdQD-QPwwEusIIwCyhoq5kXEbZEPEK3K7Tdj/s1600/larkb3.jpg" height="640" width="448" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MXRUOwPKG9s/VNpxhKT7PfI/AAAAAAAACA0/eodzztLOFmY/s1600/larkb2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MXRUOwPKG9s/VNpxhKT7PfI/AAAAAAAACA0/eodzztLOFmY/s1600/larkb2.jpg" height="640" width="372" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The bird was in a small flock (~15) Lark Sparrows in an osage orange hedgerow right on Robinson Road.Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-66140163327195075752015-01-18T20:46:00.002-08:002015-01-18T20:46:26.562-08:00Beginning research: floral polymorphisms in Trichostema laxumThe first steps of any research project are, for me, the most exciting. Therefore, I'll write a quick post on something I've been spending a bit of time on. Last summer, I spent most of the summer trying to wash off chemical defenses on leaves. One plant I chose was <i>Trichostema laxum</i> - a mint endemic to California (it may occur in extreme southern Oregon, too) that occurs pretty commonly on dry serpentine streambeds at my field site in Lake/Napa counties. I've already written a <a href="http://naturalmusing.blogspot.com/2014/06/polymorphic-flowers-cool-natural.html" target="_blank">quick post</a> mentioning this plant, but I know a LOT more now!<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aarmDvBLBu0/VLx8LeSmLeI/AAAAAAAAB-I/o8xQhufoYlU/s1600/laxumoct2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aarmDvBLBu0/VLx8LeSmLeI/AAAAAAAAB-I/o8xQhufoYlU/s1600/laxumoct2.jpg" height="450" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Trichostema laxum</i>, October 2014, McLaughlin Reserve, Napa County. Notice the position of the stigma in relation to the anthers - the style (the stigma's tube) projects well beyond the anthers. This is the "normal" morph of the plant, referenced in the literature and seen in all herbarium specimens I've looked at so far.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
While the herbivory and exudate stuff awaits analysis (a dissertation proposal will force me to do that soon!), I discovered the aforementioned flower color polymorphism and took a bunch of baseline data on it, which may be important in the coming months. The flower color polymorphism interests me most because of one population which had a high (~3%) proportion of the white/purple morph - no others had it. Was it just a random neutral mutation that didn't drift out? If not - how is it maintained?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5U5Ec3IO0cQ/VLx92cp2njI/AAAAAAAAB-U/0OqcRyaIlHw/s1600/polymorphs.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5U5Ec3IO0cQ/VLx92cp2njI/AAAAAAAAB-U/0OqcRyaIlHw/s1600/polymorphs.jpg" height="506" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The four polymorphs of flower color. All from summer 2015, McLaughlin Reserve, Napa/Lake Counties.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The first question was, do the various flower colors differ in fitness from the normal (purple) morph? <i>Trichostema laxum</i> along with most other annual plants in California grasslands and serpentine barrens, is extremely variable in size depending on the microclimatic conditions. Within a population, some individuals can have three orders of magnitude more flowers than others (~10 to ~10,000). I found one small bush-sized individual (probably nearly a meter square) on a gopher mound - clearly the gopher had changed the nutrients or hydrology of that specific location favorably! Therefore, I compared polymorphs to their nearest neighbor of the normal morph, in an attempt to minimize this variability. This was a coarse test (without a huge amount of power), but I found no differences, though large variability among individuals. I will - hopefully - be able to confirm this in the laboratory rather easily. I took a good amount of pollinator data - which also awaits analysis.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-POaNWE-ijSQ/VLyAy_rcS7I/AAAAAAAAB-g/tXw8TKHeQhQ/s1600/pinktricho.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-POaNWE-ijSQ/VLyAy_rcS7I/AAAAAAAAB-g/tXw8TKHeQhQ/s1600/pinktricho.jpg" height="402" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A pink morph just barely open (though the stigma is open, so maybe its deformed?). McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The next logical step in the investigation was to grow plants in the lab and find out whether the color polymorphisms were heritable - an important consideration in any investigation relating to population-level polymorphisms. Trichostema have a reputation for being a tough genus to grow, in fact, a professor at Davis told me a former grad student planned a project on them, but couldn't get any germination. I've been more fortunate (with help from Danny Barney at the USDA) and got decent germination with a rather simple protocol - <i><u>laxum</u></i> may be less picky than its relatives. I grew them all fall - they flowered in November and early December.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IUOpHGN6KGY/VLyChgWLARI/AAAAAAAAB-o/B1OXjTi-qN0/s1600/tricholab.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IUOpHGN6KGY/VLyChgWLARI/AAAAAAAAB-o/B1OXjTi-qN0/s1600/tricholab.jpg" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">One of the first individuals in the lab. Isn't it cute?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
When I started looking closely at the plants in the lab, I found two more polymorphisms. The first was the lower lip patterning. In normal plants, the lower lip - and sometimes the next lowest two petals, have some purple splotches on them. This is likely a nectar guide, leading pollinators to the reward (<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=nectar+guide+ultraviolet&safe=off&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=667&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=P4O8VPWlOI-wyATrooKwBA&ved=0CCoQsAQ&dpr=1" target="_blank">and often only visible/really cool in the UV</a>). I knew in the field that the completely white morph lacked a nectar guide as it lacks anthocyanin, the red/purple pigment in most plants, completely, so a purple nectar guide would be precluded. But I was surprised to see a purple flowered plant lacking it.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_7QkZ4h3n4g/VLyELwPKccI/AAAAAAAAB-0/2z3MoVAktBk/s1600/patternlesslowerlip.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_7QkZ4h3n4g/VLyELwPKccI/AAAAAAAAB-0/2z3MoVAktBk/s1600/patternlesslowerlip.jpg" height="502" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Clean purple lower lip. December 2014, in lab. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
While interesting, this was only found in one plant (though I have seeds of it now). Another polymorphism was also obvious in the captive plants and it solved one of my summer mysteries. During the summer, I wanted to do crosses with the various colored flowers. I didn't think it would be that hard - an older paper reported that <i>T. laxum</i> was non-selfing and covered plants produced no seed. So I placed pollinator exclosures over a bunch of plants and did crosses by moving pollen from one plant to another. I then covered the plants again, letting them naturally set seed and figuring that the only seed I'd get would be that of the crosses. I pollinated ~10 flowers per plant and since mints have only 4 ovaries per flower, I figured I could get about 40 seeds a plant (probably 30 since my fine motor skills aren't all that great). When I uncaged the plants and collected the seeds in October, I got quite a surprise - large numbers of seeds. Though not a full complement from any plant (there are MANY reasons for this besides lack of pollen), I got way too many seeds to have been either 1) my pollination, or 2) occasional lapses in the pollinator exclosures. Clearly the plants were self-pollinating somehow.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8HozSqS2snA/VLyG22nmGSI/AAAAAAAAB_A/N8eo50vzBTs/s1600/selfing.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8HozSqS2snA/VLyG22nmGSI/AAAAAAAAB_A/N8eo50vzBTs/s1600/selfing.jpg" height="640" width="620" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">And here is the solution to the mystery! Where is the stigma? Its pretty much in the middle of the anthers. This one isn't quite mature yet, but instead of opening after growing far past the anthers (see the first picture), it will open either right in the anthers or ever so slightly beyond. McLaughlin Reserve, Lake County, CA.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Looking closely at the individuals in the lab revealed the reason for this mystery. Some plants, like the first picture in this post, had long styles, which projected the stigma far past the anthers. Others, like the one above, had short styles and the stigma was amidst, or ever so slightly past the anthers. This proximity (I think) allows the plant to self pollinating either directly, or with the slightest bit of wind or insect movement (the "self-pollinating" morph. In the lab, more than half the plants developed into the self-pollinating morph, and while I hadn't noted it during the season, I was able to go back to the hundreds of pictures I took and found pictures of it in the field. Strangely, they are not in the same proportion - my pictures are primarily of the "normal" variety - which accords with the one paper on the plant, as well as descriptions. I then examined the specimens in the herbarium, all of which were the "normal" morph (and purple, with patterned lower lips). Whether the lab creates the right environment for this morph to develop (whether there is a genetic propensity for it, or it is somewhat environmentally-driven) is unknown now, but I am working on it. Jenny Van Wyk - another grad student at Davis and extremely knowledgeable plant reproductive biologist - have quantified the differences between these morphs and found some really interesting correlates.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oxeqIF9lHjs/VLyKabY4-zI/AAAAAAAAB_M/fADRVSE1d28/s1600/morphs.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oxeqIF9lHjs/VLyKabY4-zI/AAAAAAAAB_M/fADRVSE1d28/s1600/morphs.jpg" height="640" width="550" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Flowers of the two morphs (self-pollinating, top; normal, below), at the same scale (lower lip broken in lower photo). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Preliminarily - and our sample size is low as of now - the self-pollinating morph has larger flowers (corolla length, display height, style length), produces more pollen (300x more!) and has more, but more dilute, nectar. There is variability within morph, but so far, each plant has fit into one of the two morphs easily. How much this is an artifact of the laboratory setting is unclear, but photos of the self-pollinating morph and the pollinator-excluded plants producing seed point to something interesting happening in the field. Right now we are focused on the laboratory aspect, but we are considering experiments and observational data to be performed/gathered this upcoming year. We'd love to hear what anyone thinks of the system and interesting questions we can ask with it!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'll have some photos and interesting observations from my three-week trip to Chile soon, too. Lots of interesting botany, entomology and birdwatching (condors!).</div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-61156024190280698382014-11-20T16:33:00.002-08:002014-11-20T16:33:45.157-08:00Germination of Abronia, a new trick<i>Abronia</i>, sand verbena, is a cool genus of an odd plant family - the Nytaginaceae "four o'clock family" - that has a number of members in coastal and desert western North America. Growing it is a pain; I've talked to now about a half dozen people who've said they gave up.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aJbMBoB40c0/VG6DMUIk2hI/AAAAAAAAB40/PjnnmqZlHj0/s1600/aIMG_2300.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aJbMBoB40c0/VG6DMUIk2hI/AAAAAAAAB40/PjnnmqZlHj0/s1600/aIMG_2300.jpg" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pretty flowers reminiscent of garden <i>Lantana</i>, but not closely related!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Rick Karban and I are doing a project at Bodega on <i>Abronia latifolia</i> and I thought it'd be nice to have some in the lab for a future experiment. I poked about and found that others had some success using various methods: <a href="http://appliedeco.org/reports/abronia_umbellata_germination_ipps.pdf" target="_blank">cold stratification</a>, <a href="http://www.bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.1894/F01-JB-18.1" target="_blank">scarification with sandpaper</a>, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140196307003047#" target="_blank">a ripe apple as a source of ethylene</a>. Others just expressed <a href="http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/load/alpines/msg0407510411943.html?2" target="_blank">frustration</a>. I tried the apple, sandpaper and cold stratification without <i>any</i> success.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBUB6t_aq4_H7Nq0OAmOH38EydtuH15hJAwz-2ngUi_cIKKi7lG0o9o2WMgsUKcwH5D4AvmYZc26b6fuilNWgapt6GMXv1uoaj4svhz1GpJQ1NFtRP1dfOl8TR4tGgSAtS-a2CNn6vzEu-/s1600/abroniaminer2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBUB6t_aq4_H7Nq0OAmOH38EydtuH15hJAwz-2ngUi_cIKKi7lG0o9o2WMgsUKcwH5D4AvmYZc26b6fuilNWgapt6GMXv1uoaj4svhz1GpJQ1NFtRP1dfOl8TR4tGgSAtS-a2CNn6vzEu-/s1600/abroniaminer2.jpg" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;">The cool, weird mine of <i style="background-color: white; text-align: start;">Lithariapteryx </i><i style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: start;">abroniaeella</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: start;">, a mining caterpillar common on <i>A. latifolia</i> at Bodega.</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Fortunately, I found a trick that's given me greater than >75% germination. Unfortunately, it is not possible on a large scale (i.e. a couple dozen plants are fine, a couple hundred would be maddening). <i>Abronia</i> seeds come wrapped in an <a href="http://waynesword.palomar.edu/images/anthoc3.jpg" target="_blank">anthocarp</a>. Remove that - most will be empty, but 25-50% will have a seed. Take the seeds and soak them in DI water for a few hours - I generally do this from the morning to the afternoon, so about 4 hours, but I forgot about one batch and left them in for 24 and they were fine. Now the tricky part. Take a pair of fine tipped forceps and carefully remove the entire seed coat. In soaked seeds it will just come off. <i><b>Be very careful not to damage the seed.</b></i> Don't worry though, you'll get the hang of it after a few. Then place on wetted blotting paper under a light - don't allow it to dry out. In three or four days, the leaves will be green and roots will have started forming and you can transplant into well-drained soil.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bXQao_ywyUo/VG6HpFLWMDI/AAAAAAAAB5M/o4f9SMrXX3U/s1600/IMG_2317.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bXQao_ywyUo/VG6HpFLWMDI/AAAAAAAAB5M/o4f9SMrXX3U/s1600/IMG_2317.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A sand-verbena living up to its name. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
They grow slowly, but seem hearty (n.b. I've only had them alive for a month or so). I don't have seeds of any species besides <i>A. latifolia</i>, so I can't say it works for them, but I'd bet it does (and if anyone does have any, I'd love to get ahold of some). Do let me know if you try!Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-77088685133457749612014-09-27T14:46:00.000-07:002014-09-27T14:47:31.361-07:00Cutting up an old friend: the life and times of a suburban tree. I'm back in the northeast for a bit. My parents had to have an old white oak (<i>Quercus alba</i>) removed from our yard, as it hung over the driveway and the house and dropped a big branch on my dad's car last year. The two trunks stood less than a meter from the driveway and it was shaded on one side by tall white pines (<i>Pinus strobus</i>), the other side by the house and sheltered an understory of pokeweed and poison ivy. Notably, in the mid-90's, I spent considerable time in a rickety treehouse between the two trunks. More recently, I'd watch migrant warblers in the spring and fall and chickadees, nuthatches and creepers in the fall on it - for awhile a suet feeder hung which we watched from the kitchen windows.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Vj6YxaBOmD8/VCX_4rVW43I/AAAAAAAAB04/yl48iqKiaY0/s1600/oldoak.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Vj6YxaBOmD8/VCX_4rVW43I/AAAAAAAAB04/yl48iqKiaY0/s1600/oldoak.jpg" height="640" width="372" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The author in the tree "house", 1993. The author is 5, the tree ~ 90.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I only know the history of the tree since ~1991 (and those early years, I don't actually remember). But the removal of the tree offered the opportunity to see its history. What had it seen? How old is it? Did the building of a house/driveway next to it cause it any harm? It was obvious from the start that this "tree" started as two individual oaks, which then joined (inosculated is apparently the correct term for this - <a href="http://www.nativetreesociety.org/multi/hugging/hugging_trees.htm" target="_blank">see some striking examples here</a>)<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ifJ2z4KQP68/VCXzfbmv2ZI/AAAAAAAAB0o/XBeSyYD6BNk/s1600/IMG_7770.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ifJ2z4KQP68/VCXzfbmv2ZI/AAAAAAAAB0o/XBeSyYD6BNk/s1600/IMG_7770.JPG" height="640" width="426" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Days before its demise. 2014. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Chainsaw marks had made reading the rings difficult, so I sanded a line on each side of the stump and tried to make out the rings.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0saXtkKNkZs/VCcUYw8b1uI/AAAAAAAAB1I/W9TaUzHIjZY/s1600/IMG_1375.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0saXtkKNkZs/VCcUYw8b1uI/AAAAAAAAB1I/W9TaUzHIjZY/s1600/IMG_1375.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">In progress. The far right side of this photo actually is asphalt, though hidden under debris - the tree was only </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
What I found, indicated that I needed to do more work. A set of really thin lines occurred in the early 1970's on one trunk and late 1970's on the other. So clearly I couldn't delineate them accurately. What caused those really lean years, I figured initially must have been the construction of the house and the building of the asphalt driveway practically on the tree.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-e5Me7W9OEdY/VCcWimMkT0I/AAAAAAAAB1U/Kv34Vc7cBdc/s1600/ringsbad.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-e5Me7W9OEdY/VCcWimMkT0I/AAAAAAAAB1U/Kv34Vc7cBdc/s1600/ringsbad.jpg" height="230" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Something is wrong here! Blow this up to see better. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Therefore, my dad and I planed the whole stump (until the planer broke, ~50% done). This allowed us to also see clearly the junction of the two trees.<br />
<br />
So what caused that big set of lean years, now correctly dated as 1976-1982? The house was built in 1982... the driveway a few years later - that certainly didn't cause the lean years as I had initially hypothesized. So what happened?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IijtuFomLE8/VCcYMfVzLXI/AAAAAAAAB1o/nKr1c1_LV4g/s1600/IMG_1397.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IijtuFomLE8/VCcYMfVzLXI/AAAAAAAAB1o/nKr1c1_LV4g/s1600/IMG_1397.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Now, a couple hours later, they line up!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Let's construct the history of the tree. Because the planer broke before I could get to the very center, I actually don't have good resolution the first couple years. The left trunk (father from the driveway), looks to have put down its first ring in ~1900, the other a few years later, ~1904. What was happening in Wrentham at that time? In 1870, Wrentham had <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1870e-05.pdf" target="_blank">2202</a> people, 1900 - 2720 and <a href="http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/41084506no553ch2.pdf" target="_blank">1910 - only 1748 people</a>. I suspect that loss of populations corresponded with the degradation of farmland, and increased exports of agriculture from the great plains (at least this is what I remember from a New England environmental history course in college). A large dairy farm up the road - Birchwold Farm, <a href="http://alltrails.com/trail/us/massachusetts/birchwold-farm" target="_blank">now a great conservation area</a> (best place to find black racers around Wrentham) - folded at about the same time.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E-HCLCbY7hI/VCclGmt5i1I/AAAAAAAAB14/igLLIqf-CaA/s1600/IMG_1397.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E-HCLCbY7hI/VCclGmt5i1I/AAAAAAAAB14/igLLIqf-CaA/s1600/IMG_1397.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Had the tree been paying attention to world events, it might have noticed these (a smattering of things I could think of<br />
no rhyme or reason to them). </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So these trees took root - not a meter apart, in the first decade of the century or slightly before on what was likely fallow farmland reverting to mixed deciduous forest - what most of New England has gone through at one point or another. They then grew steadily through the next few decades until 1944-1946, when growth slowed to an inchworm's pace for both stems. Many factors could slow a tree's growth in this way including drought, <a href="http://www.hurricanescience.org/history/storms/1940s/GreatAtlantic/" target="_blank">this hurricane</a>, an abnormally short growing season, an ice storm (leading to loss of healthy limbs), or insect outbreaks, to name but a few. Which ones contributed to this, I don't know, nor can I find any information on anything abnormal happening in that period (but do let me know if you do!).<br />
<br />
The next big hit the trees took was in the late 1970's - 1980's. At first glance, the cause is obvious: the two trees hit. When this happened, they seem to have put much effort into wood building at the junction - perhaps as a form of competition - as the lines are quite wide at the junction, but get infinitesimally small around the other 3/4 of the trunk. This period is why I didn't get equal counts from the two trees. Even with a hand lens, I couldn't make out the lines accurately on the first area I sanded. In the center of the junction a crack is visible - this is where vascular tissue never grew, I suspect the soft material in the center is old, compacted outer layers of bark which had nowhere to go when the fusion happened around them. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BRpR_gmUeZc/VCcreLc5VvI/AAAAAAAAB2I/YfOxGAnLe8U/s1600/IMG_1355.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BRpR_gmUeZc/VCcreLc5VvI/AAAAAAAAB2I/YfOxGAnLe8U/s1600/IMG_1355.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A branch with some sort of rot - <a href="http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn74109.html" target="_blank">I presume fungal</a>. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But I suspect that is not the whole story. 1981 was the worst year for both trees - they put on pretty negligible growth even in the usually fat junction area. I suspect this was due to the worst ever infestation of gypsy moths, an invasive caterpillar which defoliated <a href="http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/fidls/gypsymoth/gypsy.htm" target="_blank">almost 13 million acres of oak</a> and other deciduous trees in this area that year. Because these caterpillars can almost entirely defoliate a tree, that tree won't have much photosynthetic tissue that season and will suffer reduced growth, and if this repeats, as another invasive, the winter moth, often does, it can kill trees.<br />
<br />
Since that time, the trees had been growing steadily... gaining a tree "house" in 1993 and losing a limb here or there in a storm, possibly pre-weakened branches because of fungal infection or physical injury.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-p0DweqhGwCw/VCcvkAil4qI/AAAAAAAAB2U/OlN6ixpqNig/s1600/IMG_1351.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-p0DweqhGwCw/VCcvkAil4qI/AAAAAAAAB2U/OlN6ixpqNig/s1600/IMG_1351.JPG" height="426" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Two days of this before the fun (the tree rings and research) began.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now that my parent's house has a wood-burning stove, a tree will have to be taken out every year or so. Will that upset the ecology of the area? It probably won't have a huge effect, but it may midly benefit it by creating a rare microhabitat in the area. Because our neighborhood is suburban, most snags (dead trees) are removed quickly and probably not left on the ground. The stumps and leftover wood which could not be split and used as firewood will lie around, food for insects (perhaps <a href="http://www.myrmecos.net/2012/10/23/answer-to-the-monday-limerick-horntail/" target="_blank">horntails!</a>) or fungi, which will of course attract other insects or birds and continue on up. And for curiousity's sake, the next tree will give us a better idea of what happened in 1944-1946 and the 1970's and 1980's. If we see that the 70's and 80's cruised by without a single hitch, the reduced growth in these trees is probably competitively-caused. If 1981 was a bad year for the new tree - gypsy moths are the likely culprit. If the whole period is bad for the other tree as well, then the microclimate may have been unfavorable. Perhaps before the house was built construction or other land use change occurred, which was unfavorable to the trees.<br />
<br />
While it is a little sad to see an old friend go, it was necessary for safety of the house, cars and inhabitants, useful for heating, and the history was exciting and informative. Next time you see a tree down, check it out - much can be learned from it!<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5429892255401711127.post-19914570545756634952014-08-08T11:18:00.000-07:002014-08-08T11:18:32.717-07:00ESA2014 preview: External chemical defenses in plants<i>I'll be presenting this at 1:30 PM on Wednesday in the Plant-Insect Interactions II session in the Compagno room. Fellow GGE student and collaborator Billy Krimmel will follow soon after with an interesting talk on tarweeds. </i><br />
<br />
I've been studying chenopods and their salt bladder system - which is important both physiologically and defensively for the plant - for awhile and with some gentle nudging from my committee, I've been trying to place the chenopod system into a broader context. Namely, what ecologically and evolutionarily differs between a plant which sequesters its chemical defenses (alkaloids, tannins, etc.) in its tissues and one which secretes them onto plant surfaces?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tkfVm81pXWM/U-UQyLLQlLI/AAAAAAAABmA/L2UKz6cqV5g/s1600/1149.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tkfVm81pXWM/U-UQyLLQlLI/AAAAAAAABmA/L2UKz6cqV5g/s1600/1149.jpg" height="424" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Glandular trichomes (secretory and non-secretory) cover the surfaces of <i>Trichostema laxum</i>.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Coming from New England, where plants with copious exudates are less common, the summer in California is a bonanza of sticky, oily, slimy (!) and otherwise exudate-covered plants. Is this pattern driven by rainfall? Many of these species have congeners elsewhere without copious exudates (e.g. Trichostema, Lessingia, etc.), which begs the question: are exudates effective defenses only in arid environments? Are the defenses liable to environmental removal?<br />
<br />
I therefore set up a series of experiments examining these questions. In one, I simulated rain on individuals in a population of <i>Atriplex rosea </i>- a chenopod with defensive exudates - while holding other individuals as controls and rainfall controls (which received water at the base, not on the leaves) and assessed herbivory at the end of the season. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I found a significant increase in herbivory in the group which received rainfall, suggesting that instead of helping these arid, water-starved plants, the rainfall and subsequent removal of exudates (which are entirely water-soluble in <i>A. rosea</i>) actually increased its susceptibility to herbivores.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-inGa3P4iEnI/Up92xIGep3I/AAAAAAAABjo/SVJwiwqYUXA/s1600/chenopods.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-inGa3P4iEnI/Up92xIGep3I/AAAAAAAABjo/SVJwiwqYUXA/s1600/chenopods.jpg" height="470" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Chenopods with external defenses (<i>Atriplex prostrata</i> and <i>rosea</i>) and without (<i>Chenopodiastrum murale</i>) at my field site.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Come to my talk to hear more!<br />
<br />
<br />Eric LoPrestihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10451002993518688967noreply@blogger.com3