ArticleBMC ecology and evolution2023
Elevated rates of dietary generalization in eusocial lineages of the secondarily herbivorous bees.
Article in BMC ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
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
backgroundWithin the Hymenoptera, bees are notable for their relationship with flowering plants, being almost entirely dependent on plant pollen and nectar. Though functionally herbivorous, as a result of their role as pollinators, bees have received comparatively little attention as models for insect herbivory. Bees often display dietary specialization, but quantitative comparison against other herbivorous insects has not previously been conducted.
resultsIn the most comprehensive analysis to date for 860 bee species, dietary specialization amounted to 50.1% of studied species collecting pollen from between 1 and 2 botanical families with a relatively long tail of dietary generalists, with 11.1% of species collecting from more than 10 botanical families. This distribution deviated from the truncated Pareto distribution of dietary breadth seen in other herbivorous insect lineages. However, this deviation was predominantly due to eusocial bee lineages, which show a range of dietary breadths that conformed to a normal distribution, while solitary bees show a typical truncated distribution not strongly different from other herbivorous insects. We hypothesize that the relatively low level of dietary specialization in bees as a whole reflects the relaxation of the constraints typically observed in herbivorous insects with a comparatively reduced importance of plant chemistry and comparatively increased importance of phenology and foraging efficiency. The long flight periods of eusocial bees that are necessary to allow overlapping generations both allows and necessitates the use of multiple flowering resources, whereas solitary bees with short flight periods have more limited access to varied resources within a constrained activity period.
conclusionsCollectively, solitary bees show slightly lower specialization compared to other herbivorous insects, possibly due to their balanced relationship with plants, rather than direct antagonism such as seen in the direct consumption of plant tissues. An additional factor may be the mediocre diversity of bees at low latitudes combined with low levels of dietary specialization, whereas these areas typically display a high rate of specialization by herbivorous insects in general. Though the most important factors structuring dietary specialization in bees appear to differ from many other herbivorous insects, solitary bees show a surprisingly similar overall pattern of dietary specialization.
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.