Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39210281›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2024

Genotypic variation in blueberry flower morphology and nectar reward content affects pollinator attraction in a diverse breeding population.

Juliana Cromie, John J Ternest, Andrew P Komatz, Paul M Adunola, Camila Azevedo, Rachel E Mallinger, Patricio R Muñoz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Juliana CromieDepartment of Horticultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
John J TernestDepartment of Entomology and Nematology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Andrew P KomatzDepartment of Horticultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Paul M AdunolaDepartment of Horticultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Camila AzevedoDepartment of Horticultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Rachel E MallingerDepartment of Entomology and Nematology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Patricio R MuñozDepartment of Horticultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. p.munoz@ufl.edu.

Funding

Southern SARE GS21-244
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPollination is crucial to obtaining optimal blueberry yield and fruit quality. Despite substantial investments in seasonal beekeeping services, blueberry producers consistently report suboptimal pollinator visitation and fruit set in some cultivars. Flower morphology and floral rewards are among the key factors that have shown to contribute to pollinator attraction, however little is known about their relative importance for improving yield in the context of plant breeding. Clarifying the relationships between flower morphology, nectar reward content, pollinator recruitment, and pollination outcomes, as well as their genetic components, can inform breeding priorities for enhancing blueberry production. In the present study, we measured ten flower and nectar traits and indices of successful pollination, including fruit set, seed count, and fruit weight in 38 southern highbush blueberry genotypes. Additionally, we assessed pollinator visitation frequency and foraging behavior over two growing seasons. Several statistical models were tested to optimize the prediction of pollinator visitation and pollination success, including partial least squares, BayesB, ridge-regression, and random forest.

resultsRandom forest models obtained high predictive abilities for pollinator visitation frequency, with values of 0.54, 0.52, and 0.66 for honey bee, bumble bee, and total pollinator visits, respectively. The BayesB model provided the most consistent prediction of fruit set, fruit weight, and seed set, with predictive abilities of 0.07, -0.08, and 0.42, respectively. Variable importance analysis revealed that genotypic differences in nectar volume had the greatest impact on honey bee and bumble bee visitation, although preferences for flower morphological traits varied depending on the foraging task. Flower density was a major driving factor attracting nectar-foraging honey bees and bumble bees, while pollen-foraging bumble bees were most influenced by flower accessibility, specifically corolla length and the length-to-width ratio.

conclusionsHoney bees comprised the majority of pollinator visits, and were primarily influenced by nectar volume and flower density. Corolla length and the length-to-width ratio were also identified as the main predictors of fruit set, fruit weight, seed count, as well as pollen-foraging bumble bee visits, suggesting that these bees and their foraging preferences may play a pivotal role in fruit production. Moderate to high narrow-sense heritability values (ranging from 0.30 to 0.77) were obtained for all floral traits, indicating that selective breeding efforts may enhance cultivar attractiveness to pollinators.

Indexed as

Blueberry PlantsFlowersGenotypePlant NectarPollinationAnimalsBeesFruitGenetic VariationPlant BreedingPlant NectarFloral rewardsHeritabilityMorphological traitsPlant breedingPlant-pollinator interactionsPollinationVaccinium

Identifiers

PMID39210281
PMCPMC11360736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.