Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39853708›Full record

ArticleThe New phytologist2025

Pollination efficiency and the evolution of sex allocation - diminishing returns matter.

Lawrence D Harder, Steven D Johnson

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The New phytologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lawrence D HarderDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2303-5076
Steven D JohnsonCentre for Functional Biodiversity, School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal Pietermaritzburg, Private Bag X01, Scottsville, 3209, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-5114-5862

Funding

National Research Foundation of South Africa 110768National Research Foundation of South Africa 46372Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2018-03907
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immobility of flowering plants requires them to engage pollen vectors to outcross, introducing considerable inefficiency in the conversion of pollen production into sired seeds. Whether inefficiencies influence the evolution of the relative resource allocation to female and male functions has been debated for more than 40 years. Whereas early models suggested no effect, negative interspecific relations of mean pollen production and pollen : ovule ratios to the proportion of removed pollen that is exported to stigmas (pollen-transfer efficiency) indicate otherwise. Here, we consider theoretically a key condition that determines whether the efficiencies of processes (first derivative of process output with respect to input) affect the evolutionarily stable sex (ESS) allocation. No effect arises if all individuals experience the same efficiency. By contrast, a decline in process efficiency with increasing allocation (diminishing returns) generally reduces the ESS male allocation for a population. Furthermore, differences in the allocation dependence of efficiencies (and hence the ESS sex allocation) among populations/species create a negative relation of realised efficiency to male allocation among species, like that observed empirically. Diminishing returns arise for various processes that affect siring (e.g. pollen export and local pollen competition to fertilise ovules), which may differ in their relative influence on sex allocation among species.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionPollinationModels, BiologicalOvulePollenlocal mate competitionmarginal advantage theorempollen limitationpollen–ovule ratiopollination efficiencysex allocation

Identifiers

PMID39853708
PMCPMC11883055

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.