Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32724547›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2020

Honey bees and wild pollinators differ in their preference for and use of introduced floral resources.

Christine Urbanowicz, Paige A Muñiz, Scott H McArt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
12.2field-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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Addressing emerging issues in entomology: 2023 student debates.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2024
    Article
  7. The Invasive Alien PlantPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christine UrbanowiczDepartment of Entomology Cornell University Ithaca NY USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6582-3794
Paige A MuñizDepartment of Entomology Cornell University Ithaca NY USA.
Scott H McArtDepartment of Entomology Cornell University Ithaca NY USA.
Cornell University · US

Funding

Transmission Networks in Trait-Based CommunitiesR01GM122062 · NIGMS · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI ADLER, LYNN S., ELLNER, STEPHEN PAUL · 2016 to 2019
$1.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM122062
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduced plants may be important foraging resources for honey bees and wild pollinators, but how often and why pollinators visit introduced plants across an entire plant community is not well understood. Understanding the importance of introduced plants for pollinators could help guide management of these plants and conservation of pollinator habitat. We assessed how floral abundance and pollinator preference influence pollinator visitation rate and diversity on 30 introduced versus 24 native plants in central New York. Honey bees visited introduced and native plants at similar rates regardless of floral abundance. In contrast, as floral abundance increased, wild pollinator visitation rate decreased more strongly for introduced plants than native plants. Introduced plants as a group and native plants as a group did not differ in bee diversity or preference, but honey bees and wild pollinators preferred different plant species. As a case study, we then focused on knapweed (

Indexed as

alien plantsCentaureahoney beesintroduced plantsinvasive plantsknapweedpollinatorspreference

Identifiers

PMID32724547
PMCPMC7381584
OpenAlexW3036656753

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.