Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32080216›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Pollen defenses negatively impact foraging and fitness in a generalist bee (Bombus impatiens: Apidae).

Kristen K Brochu, Maria T van Dyke, Nelson J Milano, Jessica D Petersen, Scott H McArt, Brian A Nault, André Kessler, Bryan N Danforth

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
14.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Pollinator nutrition and its role in merging the dual objectives of pollinator health and optimal crop production.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  9. Mutualism has its limits: consequences of asymmetric interactions between a well-defended plant and its herbivorous pollinator.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. IPM reduces insecticide applications by 95% while maintaining or enhancing crop yields through wild pollinator conservation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kristen K BrochuDepartment of Entomology, Penn State University, University Park, PA, USA. kkb90@psu.edu.
Maria T van DykeDepartment of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Nelson J MilanoDepartment of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Jessica D PetersenMinnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Scott H McArtDepartment of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Brian A NaultDepartment of Entomology, Cornell AgriTech, Cornell University, Geneva, NY, USA.
André KesslerDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Bryan N DanforthDepartment of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Cornell University · USMinnesota Department of Natural Resources · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plants may benefit from limiting the community of generalist floral visitors if the species that remain are more effective pollinators and less effective pollenivores. Plants can reduce access to pollen through altered floral cues or morphological structures, but can also reduce consumption through direct pollen defenses. We observed that Eucera (Peponapis) pruinosa, a specialist bee on Cucurbita plants, collected pure loads of pollen while generalist honey bees and bumble bees collected negligible amounts of cucurbit pollen, even though all groups of bees visited these flowers. Cucurbit flowers have no morphological adaptations to limit pollen collection by bees, thus we assessed their potential for physical, nutritional, and chemical pollen traits that might act as defenses to limit pollen loss to generalist pollinators. Bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) microcolonies experienced reduced pollen consumption, mortality, and reproduction as well as increased stress responses when exposed to nutritional and mechanical pollen defenses. These bees also experienced physiological effects of these defenses in the form of hindgut expansion and gut melanization. Chemical defenses alone increased the area of gut melanization in larger bees and induced possible compensatory feeding. Together, these results suggest that generalist bumble bees avoid collecting cucurbit pollen due to the physiological costs of physical and chemical pollen defenses.

Indexed as

Appetitive BehaviorPlant Defense Against HerbivoryPollenPollinationAnimalsBeesBehavior, AnimalCucurbitaFemaleFlowersNew York

Identifiers

PMID32080216
PMCPMC7033150
OpenAlexW3008576842

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.