Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39520697›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2025

Masting ontogeny: the largest masting benefits accrue to the largest trees.

Jakub Szymkowiak, Andrew Hacket-Pain, Dave Kelly, Jessie J Foest, Katarzyna Kondrat, Peter A Thomas, Jonathan G A Lageard, Georg Gratzer, Mario B Pesendorfer, Michał Bogdziewicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of botany, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Jakub SzymkowiakForest Biology Center, Institute of Environmental Biology, Faculty of Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, 61-614 Poznan, Poland.
Andrew Hacket-PainDepartment of Geography and Planning, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZT, UK.
Dave KellyCentre for Integrative Ecology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand.
Jessie J FoestForest Biology Center, Institute of Environmental Biology, Faculty of Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, 61-614 Poznan, Poland.
Katarzyna KondratForest Biology Center, Institute of Environmental Biology, Faculty of Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, 61-614 Poznan, Poland.
Peter A ThomasSchool of Life Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, UK.
Jonathan G A LageardDepartment of Natural Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester M1 5GD, UK.
Georg GratzerInstitute of Forest Ecology, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, A-1190  Austria.
Mario B PesendorferInstitute of Forest Ecology, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, A-1190  Austria.
Michał BogdziewiczForest Biology Center, Institute of Environmental Biology, Faculty of Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, 61-614 Poznan, Poland.

Funding

European Union 101039066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsBoth plants and animals display considerable variation in their phenotypic traits as they grow. This variation helps organisms to adapt to specific challenges at different stages of development. Masting, the variable and synchronized seed production across years by a population of plants, is a common reproductive strategy in perennial plants that can enhance reproductive efficiency through increasing pollination efficiency and decreasing seed predation. Masting represents a population-level phenomenon generated from individual plant behaviours. While the developmental trajectory of individual plants influences their masting behaviour, the translation of such changes into benefits derived from masting remains unexplored. METHODS AND KEY

resultsWe used 43 years of seed production monitoring in European beech (Fagus sylvatica) to address that gap. The largest improvements in reproductive efficiency from masting happen in the largest trees. Masting leads to a 48-fold reduction in seed predation in large trees compared with 28-fold in small trees. Masting yields a 6-fold increase in pollination efficiency in large trees compared with 2.5-fold in small trees. Paradoxically, although the largest trees show the biggest reproductive efficiency benefits from masting, large trees mast less strongly than small trees.

conclusionsApparently suboptimal allocation of effort across years by large plants may be a consequence of anatomical constraints or bet-hedging. Ontogenetic shifts in individual masting behaviour and associated variable benefits have implications for the reproductive potential of plant populations as their age distribution changes, with applications in plant conservation and management.

Indexed as

FagusSeedsTreesPollinationReproductionEconomies of scalefecundityforest regenerationgeitonogamymast seedingpollen limitationreproductive efficiencyseed predationseed productiontree size

Identifiers

PMID39520697
PMCPMC11904894

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.