Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “hummingbirds”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Foraging ability of rufous hummingbirds on hummingbird flowers and hawkmoth flowers.

We examine the suitability of ornithophilous flowers and sphingophilous flowers in Ipompsis and Aquilegia for nectar foraging by the hummingbird Selasphorus rufus. In S. rufus, bill length averages 18.9 mm in females and 17.3 mm in males. Maximal tongue extension approximates bill length, suggesting that birds can feed from floral tubes up to 33.5 mm in length. However, their ability to do so is limited by two factors. First, the maximal depth at which S. rufus can extract nectar decreases with the width of the floral tube. Second, feeding time is shortest in short floral tubes and progressively increases as the tubes lengthen because of increased time required for tongue extension and retraction. Hence, nectar foraging occurs with optimal efficiency in moderately broad floral tubes with lengths that do not exceed or only slightly exceed the bill length plus </=5-mm tongue extension. In most ornithophilous taxa of Ipomopsis and Aquilegia, the floral tubes have lengths and widths in the optimal range for nectar foraging by S. rufus, whereas in the sphingophilous taxa, the basal nectar either may be reached but at much higher cost or, more frequently, is beyond reach of bills and tongues. The flower-visiting habits of S. rufus and other hummingbirds in nature are generally congruent with these conclusions and support the case for coadaptation between these plants and pollinators.

Journal Article↗

Neural song control system of hummingbirds: comparison to swifts, vocal learning (Songbirds) and nonlearning (Suboscines) passerines, and vocal learning (Budgerigars) and nonlearning (Dove, owl, gull, quail, chicken) nonpasserines.

Males of certain hummingbird species such as Anna's hummingbirds (Calypte anna) learn their song during postnatal development. Here we report that male Anna's hummingbirds and male Amazilia hummingbirds (Amazilia amazilia), two singing hummingbird species, possess forebrain areas that are similar in morphological appearance, location, and connectivity to the song control areas RA (nucleus robustus archistriatalis), HVC (nucleus hyperstriatalis ventrale, pars caudale, or higher vocal center), and LMAN (lateral part of nucleus mangnocellularis anterioris) of oscine passerines (songbirds). The vocal control areas of songbirds are further defined by the expression of androgen receptors. Similarly, the singing hummingbird species express androgen receptors in the LMAN-like area and in the HVC-like area. The hummingbird RA projects to the medullary syringeal motonucleus nXIIts (nucleus hypoglossus pars tracheosyringealis) and the respiratory premotonucleus RAm (nucleus retroambigualis). The HVC-, RA-, and LMAN-like areas are rudimentary in adult male ruby-throated hummingbirds (Archilochus colubris) and Allen's hummingbirds (Selasphorus sasin) and not distinguishable in female hummingbirds, none of which sing. Vocal-area-like forebrain areas (delineated by the cytoarchitecture or androgen receptor expression) were not found in vocal nonlearning swifts and suboscines, the taxonomic sister groups of hummingbirds and songbirds, respectively. These areas were also missing in owls, ring doves, gulls, and gallinaceous species, nonpasserines that do not learn vocalizations. Budgerigars (vocal learners) are known to have forebrain vocal areas, but these areas do not express sex steroid receptors. These data suggest that hummingbirds and songbirds belong to two groups of birds that have common forebrain circuits. Parts of this circuit are organized as nuclear-like structures (LMAN, HVC, RA) in species that learn to sing.

Animals↗

Sugar and protein digestion in flowerpiercers and hummingbirds: a comparative test of adaptive convergence.

Flowerpiercers are the most specialized nectar-feeding passerines in the Neotropics. They are nectar robbers that feed on the sucrose-rich diet of hummingbirds. To test the hypothesis that flowerpiercers have converged with hummingbirds in digestive traits, we compared the activity of intestinal enzymes and the gut nominal area of cinnamon-bellied flowerpiercers (Diglossa baritula) with those of eleven hummingbird species. We measured sucrase, maltase, and aminopeptidase-N activities. To provide a comparative context, we also compared flowerpiercers and hummingbirds with 29 species of passerines. We analyzed enzyme activity using both standard allometric analyses and phylogenetically independent contrasts. Both approaches revealed the same patterns. With the exception of sucrase activity, hummingbirds' digestive traits were indistinguishable from those of passerines. Sucrase activity was ten times higher in hummingbirds than in passerines. Hummingbirds and passerines also differed in the relationship between intestinal maltase and sucrase activities. Maltase activity was two times higher per unit of sucrase activity in passerines than in hummingbirds. The sucrase activity of D. baritula was much lower than that of hummingbirds, and not unlike that expected for a passerine of its body mass. With the exception of aminopeptidase-N activity, the digestive traits of D. baritula were not different from those of other passerines.

Animals↗

The ecological and evolutionary interface of hummingbird flight physiology.

The hovering ability, rapidity of maneuvers and upregulated aerobic capacity of hummingbirds have long attracted the interest of flight biologists. The range of intra- and interspecific variation in flight performance among hummingbirds, however, is equally impressive. A dominant theme in hummingbird evolution is progressive invasion of higher-elevation habitats. Hypobaric challenge is met behaviorally through compensatory changes in wingbeat kinematics, particularly in stroke amplitude. Over evolutionary time scales, montane colonization is associated with increases in body mass and relative wing area. Hovering ability has been well-studied in several North American hummingbird taxa, yet the broad range of interspecific variation in hummingbird axial and appendicular anatomy remains to be assessed mechanistically. Such varied features as tail length, molt condition and substantial weight change due to lipid-loading can dramatically alter various features of the flight envelope. Compared with our present knowledge of hovering performance in hummingbirds, the mechanics of forward flight and maneuvers is not well understood. Relationships among flight-related morphology, competitive ability and foraging behavior have been the focus of numerous studies on tropical and temperate hummingbirds. Ecologists have hypothesized that the primary selective agents on hummingbird flight-related morphology are the behaviors involved in floral nectar consumption. However, flight behaviors involved in foraging for insects may also influence the evolution of wing size and shape. Several comparisons of hummingbird communities across elevational gradients suggest that foraging strategies and competitive interactions within and among species vary systematically across elevations as the costs of flight change with body size and wing shape.

Animals↗

Resolution of a paradox: hummingbird flight at high elevation does not come without a cost.

Flight at high elevation is energetically demanding because of parallel reductions in air density and oxygen availability. The hovering flight of hummingbirds is one of the most energetically expensive forms of animal locomotion, but hummingbirds are nonetheless abundant at high elevations throughout the Americas. Two mechanisms enhance aerodynamic performance in high-elevation hummingbirds: increase in wing size and wing stroke amplitude during hovering. How do these changes in morphology, kinematics, and physical properties of air combine to influence the aerodynamic power requirements of flight across elevations? Here, we present data on the flight performance of 43 Andean hummingbird species as well as a 76-taxon multilocus molecular phylogeny that served as the historical framework for comparative analyses. Along a 4,000-m elevational transect, hummingbird body mass increased systematically, placing further aerodynamic demands on high-elevation taxa. However, we found that the minimum power requirements for hovering flight remain constant with respect to elevation because hummingbirds compensate sufficiently through increases in wing size and stroke amplitude. Thus, high-elevation hummingbirds are not limited in their capacity for hovering flight despite the challenges imposed by hypobaric environments. Other flight modes including vertical ascent and fast forward flight are more mechanically and energetically demanding, and we accordingly also tested for the maximum power available to hummingbirds by using a load-lifting assay. In contrast to hovering, excess power availability decreased substantially across elevations, thereby reducing the biomechanical potential for more complex flight such as competitive and escape maneuvers.

Altitude↗

Hummingbird-Syndrome Traits, Breeding System, and Pollinator Effectiveness in Two Syntopic Penstemon Species.

Red-flowered, tubular Penstemon barbatus and Penstemon pinifolius, which have probably adapted independently to hummingbird pollinators, coflower on recently burned high-elevation slopes in the Chiricahua Mountains in Arizona. Hummingbirds visit both species but visit P. barbatus at a higher rate. We compared several traits and asked whether the species differed in specialization for hummingbird pollination. The corollas of P. pinifolius were 30% narrower than those of P. barbatus, but they were similar in tube length. Although a narrower corolla appeared to decrease access by large insects, small halictid bees were the only common insect visitors, and they gathered nectar from both species. Species differences in nectar production rate and concentration were minor, being smaller than within-species differences between dry and rainy periods. Taller inflorescences and a wider corolla tube may contribute to greater hummingbird use of P. barbatus. Penstemon pinifolius was fully self-compatible and weakly autogamous, whereas P. barbatus was strongly self-incompatible and had a longer flower life. Exclusion of hummingbirds reduced seed set fourfold in both species, supporting the inference from morphology and rewards that hummingbirds are the primary pollinators. In the absence of hummingbirds, halictids increased the seed set of P. barbatus relative to exclusion of all visitors, but they did not increase the seed set of P. pinifolius. Despite sharing the basic set of hummingbird-syndrome traits, the two species differed in degree of investment in individual flowers and in adaptations for outcrossing.

Journal Article↗

Take-off mechanics in hummingbirds (Trochilidae).

Initiating flight is challenging, and considerable effort has focused on understanding the energetics and aerodynamics of take-off for both machines and animals. For animal flight, the available evidence suggests that birds maximize their initial flight velocity using leg thrust rather than wing flapping. The smallest birds, hummingbirds (Order Apodiformes), are unique in their ability to perform sustained hovering but have proportionally small hindlimbs that could hinder generation of high leg thrust. Understanding the take-off flight of hummingbirds can provide novel insight into the take-off mechanics that will be required for micro-air vehicles. During take-off by hummingbirds, we measured hindlimb forces on a perch mounted with strain gauges and filmed wingbeat kinematics with high-speed video. Whereas other birds obtain 80-90% of their initial flight velocity using leg thrust, the leg contribution in hummingbirds was 59% during autonomous take-off. Unlike other species, hummingbirds beat their wings several times as they thrust using their hindlimbs. In a phylogenetic context, our results show that reduced body and hindlimb size in hummingbirds limits their peak acceleration during leg thrust and, ultimately, their take-off velocity. Previously, the influence of motivational state on take-off flight performance has not been investigated for any one organism. We studied the full range of motivational states by testing performance as the birds took off: (1) to initiate flight autonomously, (2) to escape a startling stimulus or (3) to aggressively chase a conspecific away from a feeder. Motivation affected performance. Escape and aggressive take-off featured decreased hindlimb contribution (46% and 47%, respectively) and increased flight velocity. When escaping, hummingbirds foreshortened their body movement prior to onset of leg thrust and began beating their wings earlier and at higher frequency. Thus, hummingbirds are capable of modulating their leg and wingbeat kinetics to increase take-off velocity.

Agonistic Behavior↗

Flight and size constraints: hovering performance of large hummingbirds under maximal loading.

As the smallest birds, hummingbirds are the only birds capable of prolonged hovering. This suggests that hovering locomotion scales unfavourably with size. Is the hovering performance of larger hummingbird species more constrained by size than that of smaller ones? Maximal load-lifting capacities of the two largest species of hummingbirds found in the United States, the blue-throated (Lampornis clemenciae, 8.4 g) and magnificent (Eugenes fulgens, 7.4 g) hummingbird, as well as the two other local small species, the black-chinned (Archilochus alexandri, 3.0 g) and rufus (Selasphorus rufus, 3.3 g) hummingbird, were determined under conditions of short-burst performance. The power reserves of hummingbirds are substantial relative to normal hovering performance. The two large species lifted maximal loads close to twice their body mass for a very brief duration of over 0.4 s. The small species lifted maximal loads approximately equal to their own mass with a longer duration of over 0.6 s. For the two large species under maximal loading, estimates of burst muscle mass-specific mechanical power output assuming perfect elastic energy storage averaged 309 W kg-1, compared with 75 W kg-1 during free hovering without loading. For the two small species, these values were 228 W kg-1 and 88 W kg-1, respectively. The differences in aerodynamic force production and power output between the large and small size classes occur despite their similar wing stroke velocity. This indicates that, during burst performance in these hummingbirds, the larger ones had a higher load-lifting capacity and generated more muscle power. In spite of the twofold difference in body mass, both large and small hummingbirds have evolved to become potent aerial competitors in order to exploit their common food resource, nectar. Both size classes have evolved to cope with the multi-dimensional effects of size constraining their aerodynamics, muscle mechanics, metabolism and ecology.

Animals↗

Nonadditive effects of flower damage and hummingbird pollination on the fecundity of Mimulus luteus.

Flower herbivory and pollination have been described as interactive processes that influence each other in their effects on plant reproductive success. Few studies, however, have so far examined their joint effects in natural populations. In this paper we evaluate the influence of flower damage and pollination by the hummingbird Oreotrochilus leucopleurus on the fecundity of the Andean monkey flower Mimulus luteus. We performed a 2x2 factorial experiment, with artificial clipping of lower petals and selective exclusion of the hummingbird as main factors. In spite of the relatively low proportion (27.5%) of the variance in seed production accounted for by the full factorial model, artificial damage and hummingbird exclusion, as well as their interaction, were highly significant, indicating nonadditive effects of factors on plant fecundity. In the presence of hummingbirds, undamaged flowers had a seed production that was 1.7-fold higher than for damaged flowers, suggesting that the effect of flower damage on female reproductive success occurs probably as a consequence of hummingbird discrimination against damaged corollas. This result indicates that the impact of flower herbivory on plant fecundity was contingent on the presence or absence of hummingbirds, suggesting that pollinators may indirectly select for undamaged and probably resistant flower phenotypes. A second interaction effect revealed that undamaged flowers produced 78.5% more seeds in the absence of rather than in the presence of O. leucopleurus, raising the question of the ecological mechanism involved. We suggest that the strong territorial behavior exhibited by the bee Centris nigerrima may confine the foraging activities of the remaining bee species to safe sites within exclosures. Overall, our results provide evidence that hummingbird pollination and flower herbivory have interdependent effects on M. luteus fecundity, which indicates that it will be difficult to predict their ecological and evolutionary consequences unless interactions are analyzed in an integrated form.

Animals↗

DNA hybridization evidence for the principal lineages of hummingbirds (Aves:Trochilidae).

The spectacular evolutionary radiation of hummingbirds (Trochilidae) has served as a model system for many biological studies. To begin to provide a historical context for these investigations, we generated a complete matrix of DNA hybridization distances among 26 hummingbirds and an outgroup swift (Chaetura pelagica) to determine the principal hummingbird lineages. FITCH topologies estimated from symmetrized delta TmH-C values and subjected to various validation methods (bootstrapping, weighted jackknifing, branch length significance) indicated a fundamental split between hermit (Eutoxeres aquila, Threnetes ruckeri; Phaethornithinae) and nonhermit (Trochilinae) hummingbirds, and provided strong support for six principal nonhermit clades with the following branching order: (1) a predominantly lowland group comprising caribs (Eulampis holosericeus) and relatives (Androdon aequatorialis and Heliothryx barroti) with violet-ears (Colibri coruscans) and relatives (Doryfera ludovicae); (2) an Andean-associated clade of highly polytypic taxa (Eriocnemis, Heliodoxa, and Coeligena); (3) a second endemic Andean clade (Oreotrochilus chimborazo, Aglaiocercus coelestis, and Lesbia victoriae) paired with thorntails (Popelairia conversii); (4) emeralds and relatives (Chlorostilbon mellisugus, Amazilia tzacatl, Thalurania colombica, Orthorhyncus cristatus and Campylopterus villaviscensio); (5) mountain-gems (Lampornis clemenciae and Eugenes fulgens); and (6) tiny bee-like forms (Archilochus colubris, Myrtis fanny, Acestrura mulsant, and Philodice mitchellii). Corresponding analyses on a matrix of unsymmetrized delta values gave similar support for these relationships except that the branching order of the two Andean clades (2, 3 above) was unresolved. In general, subsidiary relationships were consistent and well supported by both matrices, sometimes revealing surprising associations between forms that differ dramatically in plumage and bill morphology. Our results also reveal some basic aspects of hummingbird ecologic and morphologic evolution. For example, most of the diverse endemic Andean assemblage apparently comprises two genetically divergent clades, whereas the majority of North American hummingbirds belong a single third clade. Genetic distances separating some morphologically distinct genera (Oreotrochilus, Aglaiocercus, Lesbia; Myrtis, Acestrura, Philodice) were no greater than among congeneric (Coeligena) species, indicating that, in hummingbirds, morphological divergence does not necessarily reflect level of genetic divergence.

Americas↗

Limits to flight energetics of hummingbirds hovering in hypodense and hypoxic gas mixtures.

Hovering hummingbirds offer a model locomotor system for which analyses of both metabolism and flight mechanics are experimentally tractable. Because hummingbirds exhibit the highest mass-specific metabolic rates among vertebrates, maximum performance of hovering flight represents the upper limit of aerobic locomotion in vertebrates. This study evaluates the potential constraints of flight mechanics and oxygen availability on maximum flight performance. Hummingbird flight performance was manipulated non-invasively using air and gas mixtures which influenced metabolism via variable oxygen partial pressure and/or altered flight mechanics via variable air densities. Limits to the locomotor capacity of hovering ruby-throated hummingbirds (Archilochus colubris) were unequivocally indicated by aerodynamic failure in either air/helium or air/heliox mixtures. Air/helium mixtures are hypodense and hypoxic; failure to sustain hovering flight occurred at 63% of the density of sea-level air and at an oxygen concentration of 12%. Air/heliox mixtures are hypodense but normoxic; failure in hovering occurred at 47% of sea-level air density. Thus, hummingbirds demonstrated considerable power reserves in hovering flight as well as hypoxic tolerance. In air/helium mixtures, hovering was limited by oxygen supply and not by flight mechanics. Birds hovering in air/helium mixtures increased their mechanical power output but not their rate of oxygen consumption. By contrast, birds hovering in air/heliox mixtures increased both mechanical performance and metabolic expenditure. Under hypoxia, hovering hummingbirds demonstrated non-negligible, but still limited, capacities for anaerobic metabolism and/or oxygen storage. Depending on the physical context, hummingbird flight performance can therefore be limited by oxygen availability or by flight aerodynamics.

Air↗

Hovering performance of hummingbirds in hyperoxic gas mixtures.

Hummingbirds evolved during a period of decline in atmospheric oxygen concentration and currently encounter varying levels of oxygen availability along their elevational distribution. We tested the hypothesis that inspiration of hyperoxic gas increases hummingbird hovering performance when birds are simultaneously challenged aerodynamically. We measured the maximum duration of hovering flight while simultaneously monitoring the rate of oxygen consumption of ruby-throated hummingbirds (Archilochus colubris) in low-density heliox that was either normoxic (21% O2) or hyperoxic (35% O2). As air density decreased below 0.85 kg x m(-3), hummingbirds hovered significantly longer in hyperoxia than in normoxia, but the air density at which the birds could no longer sustain hovering flight was independent of oxygen concentration. At low air densities in hyperoxia flight trials, hummingbirds appeared to increase their rate of oxygen consumption relative to flight sequences at equivalent densities in normoxia trials, but these differences were not significant. We tested the hypothesis that hummingbirds can discriminate between environments that differ in oxygen concentration. In another density-reduction experiment, hummingbirds were allowed to choose between artificial feeders infused with either normoxic or hyperoxic gases. The hypothesis was not supported because birds failed to associate oxygen concentration with a particular feeder independently of air density. Supplemental oxygen thus yields increased hovering duration at intermediate air densities, but the minimum density at which birds can fly is limited exclusively by aerodynamic considerations.

Air↗

Flower morphology, nectar features, and hummingbird visitation to Palicourea crocea (Rubiaceae) in the Upper Paraná River floodplain, Brazil.

We investigated flower morphology, nectar features, and hummingbird visitation to Palicourea crocea (Rubiaceae), a common ornithophilous shrub found in the riparian forest understory in the Upper Paraná River floodplain, Brazil. Flowers are distylous and the style-stamen dimorphism is accompanied by other intermorph dimorphisms in corolla length, anther length, and stigma lobe length and form. We did not observe strict reciprocity in the positioning of stigma and anthers between floral morphs. Flowering occurred during the rainy season, October to December. Nectar standing crop per flower was relatively constant throughout the day, which apparently resulted in hummingbirds visiting the plant throughout the day. Energetic content of the nectar in each flower (66.5 J) and that required daily by hummingbird visitors (up to 30 kJ) would oblige visits to hundreds of flowers each day, and thus movements between plants that should result in pollen flow. Three hummingbird species visited the flowers: the Gilded Sapphire (Hylocharis chrysura), the Black-throated Mango (Anthracothorax nigricollis), and the Glittering-bellied Emerald (Chlorostilbon aureoventris). The frequency of hummingbird visitation, nectar features, and the scarcity of other hummingbird-visited flowers in the study area, indicate that P. crocea is an important nectar resource for short-billed hummingbirds in the study site.

Animals↗

Neural specialization for hovering in hummingbirds: hypertrophy of the pretectal nucleus Lentiformis mesencephali.

Hummingbirds possess an array of morphological and physiological specializations that allow them hover such that they maintain a stable position in space for extended periods. Among birds, this sustained hovering is unique to hummingbirds, but possible neural specializations underlying this behavior have not been investigated. The optokinetic response (OKR) is one of several behaviors that facilitates stabilization. In birds, the OKR is generated by the nucleus of the basal optic root (nBOR) and pretectal nucleus lentiformis mesencephali (LM). Because stabilization during hovering is dependent on the OKR, we predicted that nBOR and LM would be significantly enlarged in hummingbirds. We examined the relative size of nBOR, LM, and other visual nuclei of 37 species of birds from 13 orders, including nine hummingbird species. Also included were three species that hover for short periods of time (transient hoverers; a kingfisher, a kestrel, and a nectarivorous songbird). Our results demonstrate that, relative to brain volume, LM is significantly hypertrophied in hummingbirds compared with other birds. In the transient hoverers, there is a moderate enlargement of the LM, but not to the extent found in the hummingbirds. The same degree of hypertrophy is not, however, present in nBOR or the other visual nuclei measured: nucleus geniculatus lateralis, pars ventralis, and optic tectum. This selective hypertrophy of LM and not other visual nuclei suggests that the direction-selective optokinetic neurons in LM are critical for sustained hovering flight because of their prominent role in the OKR and gaze stabilization.

Animals↗

Cloning and analysis of the gene encoding hummingbird proinsulin.

Because hummingbirds exhibit the highest mass-specific metabolic rates seen among vertebrates and rely on sugars as their main energy source, we have investigated the structure of hummingbird insulin (Selaphorus rufus) to determine whether it possesses structural adaptations that increase its receptor binding affinity (potency). We report here the nucleotide sequence of hummingbird proinsulin determined from hummingbird genomic DNA. The predicted amino acid sequence of the A-chain of hummingbird insulin is identical to that of chickens and the B-chain differs by only one amino acid at a noncritical position, B2 (Val in hummingbird and Ala in chicken). These findings suggest that alterations in secretory and metabolic dynamics of insulin are of greater importance than changes in binding affinity in the adaptation to states of high carbohydrate flux in these very energetic organisms.

Amino Acid Sequence↗

Aerodynamics of the hovering hummingbird.

Despite profound musculoskeletal differences, hummingbirds (Trochilidae) are widely thought to employ aerodynamic mechanisms similar to those used by insects. The kinematic symmetry of the hummingbird upstroke and downstroke has led to the assumption that these halves of the wingbeat cycle contribute equally to weight support during hovering, as exhibited by insects of similar size. This assumption has been applied, either explicitly or implicitly, in widely used aerodynamic models and in a variety of empirical tests. Here we provide measurements of the wake of hovering rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus) obtained with digital particle image velocimetry that show force asymmetry: hummingbirds produce 75% of their weight support during the downstroke and only 25% during the upstroke. Some of this asymmetry is probably due to inversion of their cambered wings during upstroke. The wake of hummingbird wings also reveals evidence of leading-edge vortices created during the downstroke, indicating that they may operate at Reynolds numbers sufficiently low to exploit a key mechanism typical of insect hovering. Hummingbird hovering approaches that of insects, yet remains distinct because of effects resulting from an inherently dissimilar-avian-body plan.

Animals↗

Influence of normal daytime fat deposition on laboratory measurements of torpor use in territorial versus nonterritorial hummingbirds.

Fat deposition and torpor use in hummingbirds exhibiting distinct foraging styles should vary. We predicted that dominant territorial hummingbirds will use torpor less than subordinate nonterritorial species because unrestricted access to energy by territory owners allows for fat storage. Entry into torpor was monitored using open-flow respirometry on hummingbirds allowed to accumulate fat normally during the day. Fat accumulation was measured by solvent fat extraction. Territorial blue-throated hummingbirds (Lampornis clemenciae) had the highest fat accumulation and used torpor only 17% of the time. Fat storage by L. clemenciae averaged 26% of lean dry mass (LDM) in 1995 and 18% in 1996, similar to that measured for other nonmigratory birds. Fat storage by magnificent hummingbirds (Eugenes fulgens; trapliner) and black-chinned hummingbirds (Archilochus alexandri; nectar robber) averaged 19% and 16% of LDM, respectively, and they used torpor frequently (64% and 92% of the time, respectively). All species initiated torpor if total body fat dropped below 10% of LDM, indicating the existence of a torpor threshold. The ability of L. clemenciae to store enough fat to support nighttime metabolism is likely an important benefit of territoriality. Likewise, frequent torpor use by subordinates suggests that natural restrictions to energy intake can impact their energy budget, necessitating energy conservation by use of torpor.

Animals↗

Aechmea pectinata: a hummingbird-dependent bromeliad with inconspicuous flowers from the rainforest in south-eastern Brazil.

The pollination biology of Aechmea pectinata (Bromeliaceae) was studied in a submontane rainforest in south-eastern Brazil. This species has a mainly clumped distribution and its aggregated individuals are likely to be clones. From October to January, during the flowering period, the distal third of its leaves becomes red. The inflorescence produces 1-15 flowers per day over a period of 20-25 d. The flowers are inconspicuous, greenish-white coloured, tubular shaped with a narrow opening, and the stigma is situated just above the anthers. Anthesis begins at 0400 h and flowers last for about 13 h. The highest nectar volume and sugar concentration occur between 0600 and 1000 h, and decrease throughout the day. Aechmea pectinata is self-incompatible and therefore pollinator-dependent. Hummingbirds are its main pollinators (about 90 % of the visits), visiting flowers mainly in the morning. There is a positive correlation between the number of hummingbird visits per inflorescence and the production of nectar, suggesting that the availability of this resource is important in attracting and maintaining visitors. The arrangement of the floral structures favours pollen deposition on the bill of the hummingbirds. Flowers in clumps promote hummingbird territoriality, and a consequence is self-pollination in a broader sense (geitonogamy) as individuals in assemblages are genetically close. However, trap-lining and intruding hummingbirds promote cross-pollination. These observations suggest that successful fruit set of A. pectinata depends on both the spatial distribution of its individuals and the interactions among hummingbirds.

Animal Feed↗