Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39825751›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2025

Flower size evolution in the Southwest Pacific.

Riccardo Ciarle, Kevin C Burns, Fabio Mologni

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Riccardo CiarleTe Kura Mātauranga Koiora | School of Biological Sciences, Te Herenga Waka | Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6140, Aotearoa  New Zealand.ORCID 0009-0001-4656-670X
Kevin C BurnsTe Kura Mātauranga Koiora | School of Biological Sciences, Te Herenga Waka | Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6140, Aotearoa  New Zealand.
Fabio MologniDivision of BioInvasions, Global Change & Macroecology, University of Vienna, Vienna 1010, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsDespite accelerating interest in island evolution, the general evolutionary trajectories of island flowers remain poorly understood. In particular the island rule, which posits that small organisms become larger and large organisms become smaller after island colonization, while tested for various plant traits, has never been tested for flower size. Here, we provide the first test of the island rule for flower size for animal- and wind-pollinated flowers, and the first evidence for generalized in situ evolution of flower size on islands.

methodsFocusing on ten archipelagos in the Southwest Pacific, we amassed a dataset comprising 129 independent colonization events, by pairing each island endemic to its closest mainland relative. We then tested for the island rule in flower size and for gigantism/dwarfism in floral display for animal- and wind-pollinated flowers. KEY

resultsAnimal-pollinated flowers followed the island rule, while wind-pollinated flowers did not, instead showing evidence of gigantism. Results remained consistent after controlling for breeding system, mainland source pool, degree of taxonomic differentiation, taxonomic family and island type.

conclusionsWhile in situ evolution of flower size is widespread on islands in the Southwest Pacific, animal- and wind-pollinated flowers exhibited unexpected and markedly different evolutionary trajectories. Further studies are needed to understand the mechanisms behind these patterns.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionFlowersIslandsPollinationflower sizeisland biogeographyIsland ruleIsland syndromeplant evolutionSouthwest Pacific

Identifiers

PMID39825751
PMCPMC12445859

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.