Nectary spurs of the species investigated differ greatly in shape and length, from very short, saccate spurs in
Stereochilus and
Schoenorchis, moderately long spurs in
Ascocentrum and
Sedirea, to long spurs in
Papilionanthe. Furthermore, spur morphology is considered taxonomically significant (
Kocyan et al., 2008), with spur length being correlated with that of the mouth-parts of the pollinator. Remarkably, the presence of a spur, even in deceptive species lacking a reward, can be sufficient to attract pollinators (
Bell et al., 2009).
Species of
Ascocentrum possess weakly zygomorphic, red or orange flowers with cryptic anther caps. Their flowers lack nectar guides and fragrance. These features are characteristic of ornithophilous species (
van der Pijl and Dodson, 1969;
Proctor and Yeo, 1973;
Proctor et al., 1996;
van der Cingel, 2001;
Ortega-Olivencia et al., 2005;
Cronk and Ojeda, 2008;
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008, and references therein;
Stpiczyńska et al., 2009). Cryptic anther caps may also facilitate pollination. The presence of anther caps and pollinaria on beaks of birds usually evokes a bill-cleaning response and thus pollinia are often lost or destroyed. However, many ornithophilous species (some 50 % of hummingbird-pollinated taxa) have blue, grey, brown, cream or greyish white, cryptic anther caps, and these are thought to illicit a lesser response than their more conspicuous, yellow counterparts (
Dressler, 1971;
Topik et al., 2006). As a result, transfer of pollinaria to the stigma is more likely. Moreover, the nectary of all
Ascocentrum species studied has a collenchymatous subepidermis, similar to that found in other ornithophilous species (
Stpiczyńska and Davies, 2006;
Stpiczyńska et al., 2004,
2005,
2009). Thus, morphologically, anatomically and in terms of colour [which in
A. ampullaceum var.
aurantiacum and
A. curvifolium resembles the floral colour combinations of presumed hummingbird-pollinated
Ornithidium coccineum (Jacq.) Salisb. ex R. Br.,
O. sophronitis Rchb.f. and
Hexisea imbricata (Lindl.) Rchb.f. (
Stpiczyńska et al., 2004,
2005,
2009)], all the
Ascocentrum species studied are thought to be ornithophilous. Unfortunately, direct observations of bird pollination are rare. Nevertheless,
Slade (1980) recorded an unidentified honeyeater pollinating flowers of the hybrid
Ascocentrum ‘Sagarik Gold’ growing in his garden in Vanuatu (New Hebrides), and
Whitten et al. (2007) assert that certain brightly coloured species of
Ornithidium (Salisb.) ex R. Br. are indeed bird-pollinated.
Conversely, zygomorphy was more pronounced in the flowers of all other species investigated. They were all fragrant, with a proportionally more expanded mid-lobe to the labellum than has
Ascocentrum. They lacked red pigmentation, cryptic anther caps and subepidermal collenchyma, and this is consistent with characteristics of entomophilous species (
van der Pijl and Dodson, 1969;
van der Cingel, 2001;
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008). Their nectary spurs showed considerable variation in length.
Topik et al. (2005) reported that short-spurred species of Aeridinae are mainly pollinated by bees and beetles, whereas those species having long spurs are generally pollinated by moths. Petaloid spurs are also present in other plant groups such as
Aquilegia L. and
Impatiens L., and it has been shown that intra- and inter-specific variation in the spur length of
Aquilegia is an adaptation for pollination by a variety of different pollinators (
Hodges, 1997;
Kramer and Hodges, 2010).
Consequently, it is speculated that the species of
Stereochilus,
Schoenorchis and
Sedirea investigated here, all of which are brightly coloured in shades of purple, pink and white, and all of which produce nectar and fragrance by day, are mainly pollinated by hymenoptera. Flowers of
Papilionanthe vandarum, however, are mainly white, with relatively long spurs, indicating that this species is probably pollinated by moths (
van der Pijl and Dodson, 1969;
van der Cingel, 2001).
A ‘Saftdecke’ or nectar cover, often formed by the lateral compression of the spur (Sprengel, 1793 – cited in
Kocyan et al., 2008), appears to be present in certain species, including both ornithophilous (e.g.
Ascocentrum garayi) and entomophilous (e.g.
Schoenorchis gemmata and
Stereochilus dalatensis) taxa. Once thought by Sprengel to protect against raindrops, these nectar covers have since been interpreted by others as protection against nectar thieves or evaporation.
Of the species investigated, only
Stereochilus dalatensis has a bilocular nectary spur, the loculi or lumina being separated by a median, longitudinal septum whose function remains unknown. In all other cases, the spur was unilocular. The inner surface of the nectary spurs of
Schoenorchis gemmata,
Stereochilus dalatensis and
Sedirea japonica is glabrous to minutely papillose. Spurs possessing a glabrous inner epidermis have also been recorded for other bee-pollinated species, such as
Aerides crassifolia C.S.P. Parish ex Burb. (
Kocyan et al., 2008). Moreover,
S. dalatensis has a protuberance within the lumen, similar to that described for certain species of
Aerides (
Chen and Wood, 2009). By contrast, the internal surface of the nectary spur of
Ascocentrum species and
Papilionanthe vandarum is pubescent to hirsute. These hairs are thought to increase the total surface area for nectar secretion and re-absorption (
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008, and references therein). That trichomes can occur within the spurs of certain rewardless species, such as
Dactylorhiza fuchsii (Druce) Soó and
Barlia robertiana (Loisel.) Greuter (
Matthews et al., 2009; M. L. Matthews, Institute of Systematic Botany, University of Zürich, Switzerland, pers. comm., 2010), is thus of great interest. According to
Bell et al. (2009), in deceptive species, such trichomes or papillae can provide tactile cues for pollinators. As in many orchids (
Stpiczyńska, 1997,
2003;
Stpiczyńska and Matusiewicz, 2001;
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008;
Bell et al., 2009;
Matthews et al., 2009), the nectary trichomes of
Ascocentrum species are unicellular and conical, whereas those of
Papilionanthe are clavate and occasionally bicellular. Bicellular or multicellular trichomes also occur in the spurs of several species of Orchidinae (
Matthews et al., 2009; M. L. Matthews, Institute of Systematic Botany, University of Zürich, Switzerland, pers. comm., 2010).
In
Ascocentrum species, hairs are distributed as a wide band around the central region of the nectary spur. It is possible that their position deep within the spur prevents them from being destroyed during nectar probing. The arrangement of secretory hairs also appears to be correlated with that of the vascular bundles, the longer hairs usually occurring closer to the latter. The spurs of nearly all Aeridinae species studied here are supplied by two large and several smaller vascular strands. As a result, the distribution pattern, and thus density, of the hairs is relatively uniform. The only exception was
Papilionanthe vandarum, where hairs occur mainly as a longitudinal band along the main vascular bundle that runs the length of the adaxial wall of the spur. This is similar to the arrangement found in the moth-pollinated
Angraecum germinyanum Hook.f. (
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008).
Generally, nectar sugars are transported to the nectary, as pre-nectar, via the phloem. From here, they pass to the secretory cells, along either the symplast or the apoplast. In those members of the Aeridinae investigated, both forms of transport can coexist, as the cells are interconnected by numerous plasmodesmata, and the relatively thick cellulosic cell walls, when tested histochemically, showed no evidence of barriers to apoplastic transport. Such an arrangement has been recorded for a number of other taxa (
Fahn, 2000;
Stpiczyńska et al., 2004;
Nepi, 2007).
Anatomically, nectaries (nectary spurs) of Asiatic
Ascocentrum species closely resemble the morphologically dissimilar nectaries of Neotropical species of Maxillariinae (
Ornithidium coccineum,
O. sophronitis), Laeliinae (
Hexisea imbricata) and Oncidiinae [
Symphyglossum sanguineum (Rchb.f.) Schltr.], especially in their possession of collenchyma (
Stpiczyńska et al., 2004,
2005,
2009;
Stpiczyńska and Davies, 2006). This tissue may not only function in protecting the delicate nectary tissue from the beaks of pollinating birds, but probably, simultaneously, provides an apoplastic route for nectar movement within the nectary.
Amyloplasts were absent from the nectary cells of many species, such as
A. garayi. This is in contrast to the results obtained for most nectariferous species studied to date, where plastids differentiate to form amyloplasts and become implicated in nectar production. Typically, starch grains are abundant in amyloplasts at the presecretory stage, but as nectary secretory activity progresses, they disappear and plastids develop irregular profiles (
Nepi, 2007). Starchless nectary plastids have also been observed in
Gymnadenia conopsea (L.) R. Br. (
Stpiczyńska and Matusiewicz, 2001),
O. coccineum and
O. sophronitis (
Stpiczyńska et al., 2004,
2009) and here sugars present in the nectar are probably delivered in the phloem. The phloem component of vascular bundles supplying the nectary spur was particularly well developed for those species investigated here. This agrees with a number of previous studies which showed that a relationship exists between phloem supply and nectar carbohydrate production (
Nepi, 2007, and references therein). Although plastids within the secretory epidermal cells of those Aeridinae species studied here rarely contain starch, they frequently contain osmophilic material. This was particularly evident in
P. vandarum, where such plastids might be involved in the synthesis of secondary metabolites. The nectary cells of all species investigated, regardless of pollinator, have numerous mitochondria, ER profiles, dictyosomes and small vesicles: cellular characters concomitant with granulocrine secretion (
Nepi, 2007, and references therein).
The relatively thick cuticle overlying the secretory layer of all Aeridinae species studied lacks pores and cracks, and is probably permeable to nectar. In all species, it stained with Sudan III, indicating the presence of lipids. However, the staining reaction with auramine O was more variable. For example, in hairless species, such as
Schoenorchis gemmata and
Stereochilus dalatensis, the cuticle did not stain at all with auramine O, whereas that of
Sedirea japonica only stained slightly when compared with the staining reaction of Sudan III. The cuticle covering the secretory hairs also stained only slightly or, as in
P. vandarum, did not stain at all with auramine O, whereas that overlying flat epidermal cells showed a greater uptake of stain. These results probably indicate that variation in the chemical composition of the cuticle results in localized differences in permeability to nectar, as has been recorded for
Platanthera bifolia (L.) Rich. and
P. chlorantha Custer ex Rchb. (
Stpiczyńska, 1997,
2003). In
Schoenorchis gemmata and
Stereochilus dalatensis, however, nectar secretion is accompanied by distension of the cuticle. Although cuticular distension was not observed for other taxa, it is known to occur in certain ornithophilous Maxillariinae and Laeliinae (
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008, and references therein;
Stpiczyńska et al., 2009). On the basis of the results presented here, it would appear that distension of the cuticle is not confined to either ornithophilous or entomophilous species. Differences in the structure and thickness of the nectary cuticle were also observed for Aeridinae. For example, whereas the epidermal cuticle of
Ascocentrum garayi is lamellate, that of
Schoenorchis gemmata and
Stereochilus dalatensis has a delicate, reticulate layer. Furthermore, fine cuticular striations, although present in nectariferous
Sedirea japonica and
Papilionanthe vandarum, are absent from
Ascocentrum garayi,
A. ampullaceum var.
aurantiacum,
A. curvifolium,
Schoenorchis gemmata and
Stereochilus dalatensis.
Bell et al. (2009), however, observed cuticular striations on epidermal cells lining the spurs of nectarless Orchidinae. Therefore, whether a given species is nectariferous or rewardless is not necessarily related to the presence, or otherwise, of cuticular striations.
Despite the small number of Aeridinae species investigated here, it would appear that the nectary spur of this subtribe varies considerably in its structure. Some show modifications characteristic of ornithophilous species, whereas others display characteristics of insect-pollinated taxa. The occurrence of identical nectary trichomes and similar spur vasculature in both ornithophilous and entomophilous species of Aeridinae indicates that these structures evolved independently of pollination syndrome. Comparison of the data presented here with previous results (
Stpiczyńska and Davies, 2006;
Davies and Stpiczyńska, 2008;
Stpiczyńska et al., 2004,
2005,
2009) shows that certain, ornithophilous, Asiatic Aeridinae have a number of features in common with Neotropical, hummingbird-pollinated species assigned to subtribes Maxillariinae, Laeliinae and Oncidiinae, most notably the presence of a protective, subepidermal collenchyma. The occurrence of similar anatomical organization in orchid taxa found on other continents and assigned to other subtribes is indicative of convergence and thus appears to be related more to pollinator-driven selection than to phylogeny.
Given the enormity of Aeridinae and the relatively few species presented here, it is important that ultrastructural work now be extended to include other taxa selected according to their phylogenetic position, so as to improve upon our current knowledge and understanding of nectary diversity in this subtribe.