ArticleScientific reports2019
A comparison of coffee floral traits under two different agricultural practices.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Flowering and Fruiting ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Caffeine Consumption Helps Honey Bees Fight a Bacterial Pathogen.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Ecological quality as a coffee quality enhancer. A review.Agronomy for sustainable development · 2023Review
- Identification of sources of male sterility in the Colombian Coffee Collection for the genetic improvement of Coffea arabica L.PloS one · 2023Article
- Partial shading by solar panels delays bloom, increases floral abundance during the late-season for pollinators in a dryland, agrivoltaic ecosystem.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Floral traits and rewards are important in mediating interactions between plants and pollinators. Agricultural management practices can affect abiotic factors known to influence floral traits; however, our understanding of the links between agricultural practices and floral trait expression is still poorly understood. Variation in floral morphological, nectar, and pollen traits of two important agricultural species, Coffea arabica and C. canephora, was assessed under different agricultural practices (sun and shade). Corolla diameter and corolla tube length were larger and pollen total nitrogen content greater in shade plantations of C. canephora than sun plantations. Corolla tube length and anther filament length were larger in shade plantations of C. arabica. No effect of agricultural practice was found on nectar volume, sugar or caffeine concentrations, or pollen production. Pollen total nitrogen content was lower in sun than shade plantations of C. canephora, but no difference was found between sun and shade for C. arabica. This study provides baseline data on the influence of agronomic practices on C. arabica and C. canephora floral traits and also helps fill a gap in knowledge about the effects of shade trees on floral traits, which can be pertinent to other agroforestry systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.