Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33582870›Full record

ArticleOecologia2021

Effects of pollen and nectar inoculation by yeasts, bacteria or both on bumblebee colony development.

María I Pozo, Toon Mariën, Gaby van Kemenade, Felix Wäckers, Hans Jacquemyn

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oecologia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Microorganisms · 2023
    Article
  10. Potential effects of nectar microbes on pollinator health.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  11. The gut microbiota of bumblebees.Insectes sociaux · 2021
    Article
  12. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

María I PozoBiology Department, Plant Conservation and Population Biology, KU Leuven, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium. maribel.pozoromero@kuleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1135-1327
Toon MariënBiology Department, Plant Conservation and Population Biology, KU Leuven, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium.
Gaby van KemenadeBiology Department, Plant Conservation and Population Biology, KU Leuven, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium.
Felix WäckersBiobest Group, Research and Development, 2260, Westerlo, Belgium.
Hans JacquemynBiology Department, Plant Conservation and Population Biology, KU Leuven, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 12A0716N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is increasingly recognized that gut microbiota have a major effect on the physiology, biology, ecology and evolution of their animal hosts. Because in social insects, the gut microbiota is acquired through the diet and by contact with nest provisions, it can be hypothesized that regular supplementation of microorganisms to the diet will have an impact on the fitness of the consumer and on the development of the whole colony. To test this hypothesis, we investigated how supplementation of bacteria, yeasts, and combinations of the two to either pollen or nectar affected colony development in the social bumblebee Bombus terrestris. Three yeasts and three bacterial species that live at the flower-insect interface were used in the experiments and the development of bumblebee colonies was monitored over a period of 10 weeks. The results showed that administration of microbes via pollen had a stronger positive impact on colony development than when provided via sugar water. Supplementation of bacteria led, in general, to a faster egg laying, higher brood size and increased production of workers during the first weeks, whereas yeasts or a combination of yeasts and bacteria had less impact on colony development. However, the results differed between microbial species, with Wickerhamiella bombiphila and Rosenbergiella nectarea showing the strongest increase in colony development. Torulaspora delbrueckii induced early male production, which is likely a fitness cost. We conclude that the tested bacteria-yeast consortia did not result in better colony development than the interacting species alone.

Indexed as

Plant NectarPollenAnimalsBacteriaBeesEnterobacteriaceaeHumansSaccharomycetalesPlant NectarBacteria-yeast consortiaBee healthBombus terrestrisInsect fitnessMicrobesNectarPollen

Identifiers

PMID33582870
OpenAlexW3130369812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.