The ecological significance of toxic nectar

Although plant-herbivore and plant-pollinator interactions have traditionally been studied separately, many traits are simultaneously under selection by both herbivores and pollinators. For example, secondary compounds commonly associated with herbivore defense have bran found in the nectar of many plant species, and many plants produce nectar that is toxic ol repellent to some floral visitors. Although secondary compounds in nectar and toxic nectar are geographically and phylogenetically widespread, their ecological significance is poorly understood. Several hypotheses have been proposed for the possible functions of toxic nectar, including encouraging specialist pollinators, deterring nectar robbers, preventing microbial degradation of nectar, and altering pollinator behavior. All of these hypotheses rest on the assumption that the benefits of toxic nectar must outweigh possible costs; however, to date no study has demonstrated that toxic nectar provides fitness benefits for any plant. Therefore, in addition to the:se adaptive hypotheses. we should also consider the hypothesis that toxic nectar provides no benefits or is tolerably detrimental to plants, and occurs due to previous selection pressures or pleiotropic constraints. For example, secondary compounds may be transported into nectar as a consequence of their presence in phloem. rather than due to direct selection for toxic nectar. Experimental approaches are necessary to understand the role of toxic nectar in plant-animal interactions.