Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29134400›Full record

ArticleOecologia2018

Safe sites of pollen placement: a conflict of interest between plants and bees?

Ze-Yu Tong, Shuang-Quan Huang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oecologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ze-Yu TongInstitute of Evolution and Ecology, School of Life Sciences, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China.
Shuang-Quan HuangInstitute of Evolution and Ecology, School of Life Sciences, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China. hsq@mail.ccnu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0003-4540-1935

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 31730012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant stigmas and bee pollinators are competitors for pollen. Pollen placed on a pollinator's body can be picked up by conspecific stigmas or it can be collected by the pollinator as food. Hypothetically, one solution is for pollen to be placed on 'safe sites' on the pollinator's body, sites where the pollinator cannot easily remove it, leaving the pollen for stigmas. We compared 14 sites on the bumblebee body in terms of the ability of the bee to groom off fluorescent power, a dust that may be thought of as analogous to pollen. The safest sites were along the midline of the dorsal thorax, the dorsal abdomen, and the ventral abdomen. Next, we counted how much pollen is borne on the 14 sites by bees visiting one nectariferous and three nectarless Pedicularis species. In the four species, only 7, 26, 28, and 30% of pollen found on the bees were on safe sites. Finally, we observed that the 14 sites were contacted by stigmas of the four Pedicularis species; none of the most contacted sites were safe sites. Across all four Pedicularis species, pollen is mainly positioned on sites of the bee body that were beneficial for both the plant and the bee, not on sites detrimental to either of them. Our analysis showed that the conflict of interest between flowers and bees can be solved by cooperation. Pedicularis pollen is placed where it strengthens the mutualism between plants and pollinators.

Indexed as

PedicularisPollinationAnimalsBeesConflict of InterestFlowersPollenBee groomingBombus friseanusBuzz pollinationFluorescent powderMutualismPedicularisPollen placementPollen transferPollinationSafe site

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.