Pollination Paper
Jonathan Varghese
Pollination Paper
Title
Pollinators show no preference between Goldenrod Plants and Aster Plants regardless of differences in flower length.
Introduction
In this experiment, we observed the pollination of various plants by various pollinators in the Binghamton University Nature Preserve. We collected data by observing various plants by the pond trail area of the nature preserve and attempted to explain why some plants were structurally more attractive to pollinators than other plants. While observing a variety of plants, it became clear that the Goldenrod Plant and the Aster plant were the most attractive. This conclusion was drawn because they attracted the most pollinators. In fact, data collected of the other plants was so scarce they were deemed insignificant. The new focus of the experiment became to determine whether the Goldenrod or Aster was more attractive to pollinators and attempt to explain why. Previous works have classified both the Goldenrod plant and Aster plant as Composite Flowers, or plants that have “multiple flowers inserted on a flattened, broad receptacle,” (Koch 1930). This means that the flowers of both the Goldenrod and Aster are made up of similar, if not identical, internal structures. Thus, we attempted to attribute the differences in pollinator visitations between the two plants to differences in external structures. If a difference in pollinator preferences was observed, we would try to attribute that preference to differences in the external structure of the length of the flower. Previous works have determined the average flower length of Goldenrod plants to be ¾ of an inch (Gross &Werner 1983), and the average flower length of Aster plants to be 2 inches (Harder 1985). The analysis of the data collected in this experiment attempts to test our null hypothesis: Pollinators show no preference between Goldenrod plants and Aster plants, and our alternative or working hypothesis: Pollinators do show a
Pollination Paper
Title
Pollinators show no preference between Goldenrod Plants and Aster Plants regardless of differences in flower length.
Introduction
In this experiment, we observed the pollination of various plants by various pollinators in the Binghamton University Nature Preserve. We collected data by observing various plants by the pond trail area of the nature preserve and attempted to explain why some plants were structurally more attractive to pollinators than other plants. While observing a variety of plants, it became clear that the Goldenrod Plant and the Aster plant were the most attractive. This conclusion was drawn because they attracted the most pollinators. In fact, data collected of the other plants was so scarce they were deemed insignificant. The new focus of the experiment became to determine whether the Goldenrod or Aster was more attractive to pollinators and attempt to explain why. Previous works have classified both the Goldenrod plant and Aster plant as Composite Flowers, or plants that have “multiple flowers inserted on a flattened, broad receptacle,” (Koch 1930). This means that the flowers of both the Goldenrod and Aster are made up of similar, if not identical, internal structures. Thus, we attempted to attribute the differences in pollinator visitations between the two plants to differences in external structures. If a difference in pollinator preferences was observed, we would try to attribute that preference to differences in the external structure of the length of the flower. Previous works have determined the average flower length of Goldenrod plants to be ¾ of an inch (Gross &Werner 1983), and the average flower length of Aster plants to be 2 inches (Harder 1985). The analysis of the data collected in this experiment attempts to test our null hypothesis: Pollinators show no preference between Goldenrod plants and Aster plants, and our alternative or working hypothesis: Pollinators do show a
Cited: Gross, Ronald S., and Patricia A. Werner. "Relationships among Flowering Phenology, Insect Visitors, and Seed-Set of Individuals: Experimental Studies on Four Co-occurring Species of Goldenrod (Solidago: Compositae)." Ecological Monographs 53.1 (1983): 95-117. Print. Harder, Lawrence D. "Morphology as a Predictor of Flower Choice by Bumble Bees." Ecology 66.1 (1985): 198-210. Print. Koch, Minna Frotscher. "Studies in the Anatomy and Morphology of the Composite Flower II." American Journal of Botany 17.10 (1930): 995. Print.