Massonia grandiflora -also known as Massonia depressa- (Hyacinthaceae) is not only pollinated by rodents, but by Elephantulus edwardii as well

Pollination by small non-flying mammals in South Africa occurs for several animal species on different plant species. Mice (Muridae), dormice (Gliridae), and elephant shrews (Macroscelidae) are already known as pollinators of different plant species from the genus Hyacinthaceae (Massonia depressa / grandiflora, Massonia bifolia, and Massonia echinata). The present work further examines the flower visitors on M. grandiflora –which is also known as M. depressa-with regards on additional non-flying mammal species as pollinators to the mice and dormice species which were already described by (Johnson et al., 2001). The geoflorous plant has green coloured robust flowers, a sour musky odour and buttery-vinegar like taste, which are typical traits for the pollination syndrome of non-flying mammals. Nectar volume and sugar concentration correlate with previous gathered data of the species and with other plants that are pollinated by non-flying mammals. Camcorder, wildlife cameras and pollen transfer experiments were used to detect Myomyscus verreauxii (Muridae) and Elephantulus edwardii (Macroscelidae) as additional potential pollinators of M. grandiflora next to the already known mice species Aethomys namaquensis, Acomys subspinosus, and Gerbillurus paeba. All observed mice species and E. edwardii licked nectar from flowers, their rostra were dusted with pollen and the stigma touched the animals. Insects and birds were never observed on M. grandiflora flowers and can be excluded as pollinators of the species. Both animal groups (mice and elephant shrews) are potential pollinators of M. grandiflora. E. edwardii showed significantly more (>10 times) stigma touches and pollen deposition. Additionally pollen transfer experiments with artificial pollen confirmed E. edwardii as a more reliable pollinator compared to different mice species as E. edwardii transferred the pollen more punctual on reproductive organs. The fact that 62.5% of all flower visits were executed by E. edwardii and the non-destructive flower visits compared to mice prove, that E. edwardii is the main pollinator of M. grandiflora. Mice with 34.6% represent potential side pollinators of M. grandiflora, but cannot be excluded due to their frequent visits. Difference in pollination efficiency between mice and E. edwardii need to be investigated further. Hemicordylus capensis was also observed as a flower visitor of M. grandiflora which was recently published (Wester, 2019). However, as only >3% of flower visits were executed by H. capensis and no contacts with reproductive plant organs were observed this species could be excluded as an efficient pollinator of M. grandiflora, but their influence should be investigated further.