ArticleJournal of evolutionary biology2022
Measuring, comparing and interpreting phenotypic selection on floral scent.
Article in Journal of evolutionary biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phylogenetic history shapes the composition of floral scents in a specialized pollination mutualism.The New phytologist · 2026Article
- Natural selection on floral volatiles and other traits can change with snowmelt timing and summer precipitation.The New phytologist · 2025Article
- The Development of Floral Scent Research: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis (1987-2022).Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Water deficit changes patterns of selection on floral signals and nectar rewards in the common morning glory.AoB PLANTS · 2023Article
- Measuring, comparing and interpreting phenotypic selection on floral scent.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2022Article
- Variation in scent amount but not in composition correlates with pollinator visits within populations of deceptiveFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Natural selection on floral scent composition is a key element of the hypothesis that pollinators and other floral visitors drive scent evolution. The measure of such selection is complicated by the high-dimensional nature of floral scent data and uncertainty about the cognitive processes involved in scent-mediated communication. We use dimension reduction through reduced-rank regression to jointly estimate a scent composite trait under selection and the strength of selection acting on this trait. To assess and compare variation in selection on scent across species, time and space, we reanalyse 22 datasets on six species from four previous studies. The results agreed qualitatively with previous analyses in terms of identifying populations and scent compounds subject to stronger selection but also allowed us to evaluate and compare the strength of selection on scent across studies. Doing so revealed that selection on floral scent was highly variable, and overall about as common and as strong as selection on other phenotypic traits involved in pollinator attraction or pollen transfer. These results are consistent with an important role of floral scent in pollinator attraction. Our approach should be useful for further studies of plant-animal communication and for studies of selection on other high-dimensional phenotypes. In particular, our approach will be useful for studies of pollinator-mediated selection on complex scent blends comprising many volatiles, and when no prior information on the physiological responses of pollinators to scent compounds is available.
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.