Efficiency of using electric toothbrush as an alternative to a tuning fork for artificial buzz pollination is independent of instrument buzzing frequency

Mandeep Tayal,Jesus Chavana,Rupesh R Kariyat

doi:10.1186/s12898-020-00278-7

Mandeep Tayal, Jesus Chavana + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-020-00278-7

Copy DOI

Journal: BMC Ecology	Publication Date: Feb 10, 2020
Citations: 6	License type: open-access

Affiliation: The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley

Abstract

BackgroundBreeding programs and research activities where artificial buzz-pollinations are required to have primarily relied upon using tuning forks, and bumble bees. However, these methods can be expensive, unreliable, and inefficient. To find an alternative, we tested the efficiency of pollen collection using electric toothbrushes and compared it with tuning forks at three vibration frequencies—low, medium, and high and two extraction times at 3 s and 16 s- from two buzz—pollinated species (Solanum lycopersicum and Solanum elaeagnifolium).ResultsOur results show that species, and extraction time significantly influenced pollen extraction, while there were no significant differences for the different vibration frequencies and more importantly, the use of a toothbrush over tuning fork. More pollen was extracted from S. elaeagnifolium when compared to S. lycopersicum, and at longer buzzing time regardless of the instrument used.ConclusionsOur results suggest that electric toothbrushes can be a viable and inexpensive alternative to tuning forks, and regardless of the instrument used and buzzing frequency, length of buzzing time is also critical in pollen extraction.

Highlights

Breeding programs and research activities where artificial buzz-pollinations are required to have primarily relied upon using tuning forks, and bumble bees
We extracted significantly more pollen from S. elaeagnifolium when compared to S. lycopersicum (Fig. 1a), and among time intervals, 16 s of vibration significantly extracted more pollen when compared to 3 s (Fig. 1b)
We found that there was no significant difference between the use of tuning fork and electric toothbrush even at multiple time intervals and vibration frequencies for these two species (Fig. 1c)

Summary

Introduction

Breeding programs and research activities where artificial buzz-pollinations are required to have primarily relied upon using tuning forks, and bumble bees. We tested the efficiency of pollen collection using electric toothbrushes and compared it with tuning forks at three vibration frequencies—low, medium, and high and two extraction times at 3 s and 16 s- from two buzz—pollinated species (Solanum lycopersicum and Solanum elaeagnifolium) In another wonderful example of convergent evolution, it is estimated that around 6% of flowering plants, comprising species from multiple plant families, are primarily buzz-pollinated [1, 2]. Concealing pollen grains inside poricidal anthers conserves pollen, and has led to specialized pollinators, commonly known as buzz pollinators. These pollinators mainly include bumble bees (Bombus spp.), carpenter bees (Xylocopa spp.), and sweat bees (Lasioglossum spp.) among others, but not honeybees (Apis spp.) [4]. Studies on ecology and evolutionary biology of buzz pollination have been carried out for more than a century [10], the biomechanics, pollinator physiology and behavior in relation to buzzing have only recently gained an increased interest [1, 11, 12]

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion