Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38190523›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024

Pollen nutrition structures bee and plant community interactions.

Anthony D Vaudo, Lee A Dyer, Anne S Leonard

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
76.2field-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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Using the Solitary PollinatorEcology and evolution · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Nutrient niche dynamics among wild pollinators.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anthony D VaudoDepartment of Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557.ORCID 0000-0001-5268-5580
Lee A DyerDepartment of Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557.ORCID 0000-0002-0867-8874
Anne S LeonardDepartment of Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557.ORCID 0000-0003-4464-269X
University of Nevada, Reno · USUnited States Department of Agriculture · US

Funding

National Science Foundation (NSF) IOS-1755096
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As bees' main source of protein and lipids, pollen is critical for their development, reproduction, and health. Plant species vary considerably in the macronutrient content of their pollen, and research in bee model systems has established that this variation both modulates performance and guides floral choice. Yet, how variation in pollen chemistry shapes interactions between plants and bees in natural communities is an open question, essential for both understanding the nutritional dynamics of plant-pollinator mutualisms and informing their conservation. To fill this gap, we asked how pollen nutrition (relative protein and lipid content) sampled from 109 co-flowering plant species structured visitation patterns observed among 75 subgenera of pollen-collecting bees in the Great Basin/Eastern Sierra region (USA). We found that the degree of similarity in co-flowering plant species' pollen nutrition predicted similarity among their visitor communities, even after accounting for floral morphology and phylogeny. Consideration of pollen nutrition also shed light on the structure of this interaction network: Bee subgenera and plant genera were arranged into distinct, interconnected groups, delineated by differences in pollen macronutrient values, revealing potential nutritional niches. Importantly, variation in pollen nutrition alone (high in protein, high in lipid, or balanced) did not predict the diversity of bee visitors, indicating that plant species offering complementary pollen nutrition may be equally valuable in supporting bee diversity. Nutritional diversity should thus be a key consideration when selecting plants for habitat restoration, and a nutritionally explicit perspective is needed when considering reward systems involved in the community ecology of pollination.

Indexed as

MagnoliopsidaPollenAnimalsBeesCompulsive BehaviorLipidsNutrientsNutritional StatusLipidsNutrientsfloral rewardsGreat Basin/Eastern Sierranutritional ecologyplant–pollinator networks

Identifiers

PMID38190523
PMCPMC10801918
OpenAlexW4390658951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.