ArticleEcology and evolution2020
The role of intraspecific competition between plants in a nursery pollination system-Comments on Villacañas de Castro and Hoffmeister 2020.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of intraspecific competition between plants in a nursery pollination system-Comments on Villacañas de Castro and Hoffmeister 2020.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present comments on an article published by Villacañas de Castro and Hoffmeister (Ecology and Evolution, 10, 4220; 2020). The authors studied a tritrophic system composed of a plant, its pollinating seed predator, and a parasitoid of the latter. Their concern was whether the parasitoid modifies the interaction between the plant and its pollinator-herbivore along the mutualism-antagonism gradient, but they reduced their question to how the parasitoid impacts plant fitness. After showing that the parasitoid increases seed output of the plant by decreasing the amount of seeds consumed by the pollinating seed predator, they tested whether seed output is a good proxy for plant fitness. They argue that it is not by showing that the increased seed density has a negative impact on survival probability and flower production, likely due to plant intraspecific competition. The work presented shows careful experimentation and interesting results, but we do not share some of their conclusions. Most importantly, we believe that the net effect of the parasitoid on the plant-herbivore interaction cannot be adequately investigated by focusing on individual plant fitness. Thus, we first suggest considering the number of surviving plants up to adulthood as a proxy for population performance to address this question. Using this proxy, we show that the increase in seed output due to the parasitoid is beneficial to the plant population until its carrying capacity is achieved. Next, using a population dynamics model, we show under which particular conditions the negative effect of intraspecific competition outweighs the positive effect of seed density increase (due to parasitoid's defense). When these conditions do not hold, the role of plant intraspecific competition is basically limited to the prevention of unbounded population growth, while the parasitoid increases the plant's equilibrium density above its carrying capacity as measured when interacting only with the pollinating seed predator, thus making the system more stable.
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.