The article states moths are more efficient pollinators _at night_.
But many types flowers close at night (tulips and hibiscus for instance).
So presumably moths don't pollinate those and we still need daytime pollinators.
Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
51–60 of 111 posts
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Moths have mouthparts, butterflies generally don't. They have a specialized nectar sucking tube type organ with a "tongue" in it. Moths can rob flowers, which means they cut a small hole inside the bottom of the flower's nectar reservoir and then lap it up. Butterflies can't cut flowers.
>Moths have mouthparts, butterflies generally don't I'm not sure where you get that information. Butterflies also feed on nectar from plants, so they do have mouthparts. On another note, some butterflies (and maybe moths) are cannibals [1] and feed on their own caterpillars: "Some butterflies don’t only look like horror movie stars, but are horrors in themselves. Milkweed butterflies (Danainae) — the same subfamily t…
I was talking about nectar robbing by moths, butterflies don't do it. And butterflies only have a tube with a tongue, they don't have opposing jaws or a typical mouthpart. Moths are some of many nectar robbers who will cut a hole or slit in the bottom part of the nectar bearing parts of plants and drink that directly rather than playing by 'the rules' and going down the flower past the reproductive organs. Thus getting the benefit of the nectar without abiding by the "rules" that ensure the plant's pollentation.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#53i think we need both, and others
Don’t forget about hummingbirds. In the Americas, a lot of the pollinating job of moths is done by hummingbirds. Hummingbirds in the day, moths at night. My impression is that bees and moths/hummingbirds mostly work on different kinds of flowers that are evolved for the size and mouths of pollinators,
As a gardener I have noticed that most types of insects tend to visit as many flowers as possible. None seem to show a vast preference. I know that's not what the data shows but it's my experience.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#54The article states moths are more efficient pollinators _at night_. But many types flowers close at night (tulips and hibiscus for instance). So presumably moths don't pollinate those and we still need daytime pollinators.
Relatedly, the article states that more than 80% of pollination happens during the day. I reckon that'd probably be higher if we hadn't been so hellbent on decimating daytime pollinator populations.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#55And check out the bee-fly too:
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/bee-flies-cute-bee-mimic-with...
Lots of pollinators out there.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#56So with all of this talk for years about colony collapse and food shortages yet moths were doing the bulk of the pollinating the whole time? Or am I missing something. Not that colony collapse doesn’t worry me, it does. But if I was being baselessly told to fear agriculture production issues, I am super mad.
Per the article, the bulk of the pollinating happens during the day. Moths being individually more efficient at pollinating is only one of several variables at play here; others include the pollinator populations, the length of daytime v. nighttime, and whether or not flowers bloom during daytime v. nighttime and for how long.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#57i think we need both, and others
Don’t forget about hummingbirds. In the Americas, a lot of the pollinating job of moths is done by hummingbirds. Hummingbirds in the day, moths at night. My impression is that bees and moths/hummingbirds mostly work on different kinds of flowers that are evolved for the size and mouths of pollinators,
> Don’t forget about hummingbirds
well, that was kind of my point - there is an entire universe of small creatures, and not so small ones (lemurs, for example), that perform pollination, and we mess with them at our peril.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#58The huge difference between moths and butterflies is surprising as I consider moths nocturnal butterflies. I wonder what causes the difference.
Moths have mouthparts, butterflies generally don't. They have a specialized nectar sucking tube type organ with a "tongue" in it. Moths can rob flowers, which means they cut a small hole inside the bottom of the flower's nectar reservoir and then lap it up. Butterflies can't cut flowers.
That's not listed here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_butterflies_and_... though certainty possible Wikipedia is wrong.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#59So with all of this talk for years about colony collapse and food shortages yet moths were doing the bulk of the pollinating the whole time? Or am I missing something. Not that colony collapse doesn’t worry me, it does. But if I was being baselessly told to fear agriculture production issues, I am super mad.
(This is a hobbyhorse of mine...) At least in North America, the "colony collapse" stuff was a livestock phenomenon more than it was a wildlife/ecology issue. Honey bees aren't native to the US; if you see a honey bee in your back yard, there's a pretty good chance that somebody owns it.
>if you see a honey bee in your back yard, there's a pretty good chance that somebody owns it.
This is true even in Europe. If memory serves the percentage of "wild" honeybees (feral may be a more fitting adjective) is in the order of 1%.
Re: Moths are more efficient pollinators than bees: new research
#60Bees also produce honey in the process, basically for free. Everything in real life is a balancing act!
thaaaat is how the world works (that is how the world works)