Loading…
Butterfly feeding preferences for Buddleja selections in the landscape
In landscape studies conducted in 2002 and 2003, Buddleja davidii (Franch.) ‘White Profusion’, ‘Pink Delight’, and ‘Honeycomb’ were visited by native butterflies to a greater extent than to the remaining four Buddleja examined. In general, the lowest visitation was experienced by B. crispa (Benth.)...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of environmental horticulture 2006-03, Vol.24 (1), p.39-44 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | In landscape studies conducted in 2002 and 2003, Buddleja davidii (Franch.) ‘White Profusion’, ‘Pink Delight’, and ‘Honeycomb’ were visited by native butterflies to a greater extent than to the remaining four Buddleja examined. In general, the lowest visitation was experienced by B. crispa (Benth.) and B. lindleyana (Fortune) ‘Miss Vicie’. Overall, B. davidii ‘Pink Delight’ was visited by the greatest number of species, while B. crispa and B. lindleyana ‘Miss Vicie’ were visited by the least. Total visit duration by one randomly selected butterfly was greater for B. davidii ‘White Profusion’, ‘Honeycomb’, ‘Pink Delight’, and ‘Royal Red’ in 2003, while no differences among cultivars were found in 2002. Differences in duration per visit were observed in 2003 with B. davidii ‘White Profusion’, ‘Pink Delight’, and ‘Royal Red’ having the greatest and B. crispa the least. Plant characteristics including inflorescence number, growth index, flower morphology, and flower color characteristics differed among cultivars. Through correlation analysis plant characteristics that contributed in part to cultivar differences in visitation were determined. Cultivar differences that consistently correlated with visitation preferences were inflorescence number and growth index. Based on correlation analysis, the cultivar characteristics that did not contribute to visitation differences included flower morphology and flower color characteristics. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0738-2898 2573-5586 |
DOI: | 10.24266/0738-2898-24.1.39 |