Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29938013›Full record

ArticleMethods in ecology and evolution2018

Analysis of nectar from low-volume flowers: A comparison of collection methods for free amino acids.

Eileen F Power, Daniel Stabler, Anne M Borland, Jeremy Barnes, Geraldine A Wright

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in ecology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 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. Sweet solutions: nectar chemistry and quality.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A matter of taste: the adverse effect of pollen compounds on the pre-ingestive gustatory experience of sugar solutions for honeybees.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2019
    Article
  18. Evolutionary ecology of nectar.Annals of botany · 2019
    Review
  19. 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

5 authors.

Eileen F PowerInstitute of Neuroscience Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne UK.
Daniel StablerInstitute of Neuroscience Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne UK.
Anne M BorlandSchool of Natural and Environmental Science: Biology Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne UK.
Jeremy BarnesSchool of Natural and Environmental Science: Biology Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne UK.
Geraldine A WrightInstitute of Neuroscience Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2749-021X

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Floral nectar is a reward offered by flowering plants to visiting pollinators. Nectar chemistry is important for understanding plant nutrient allocation and plant-pollinator interactions. However, many plant species are difficult to sample as their flowers are small and produce low amounts of nectar.We compared the effects of different methods of nectar collection on the amino acid composition of flowers with low volumes of nectar. We used five methods to collect nectar from 60 (5 × 12)

Indexed as

amino acidCalluna vulgarisnectarpollinatorsampling methodUHPLC

Identifiers

PMID29938013
PMCPMC5993345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.