ArticleAnnals of botany2025
Exclusion of bird pollinators impacts mating system and reduces offspring fitness in a pollination-generalist tree.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Attraction of nocturnal scarab beetles by unusual floral volatiles in a Banksia (Proteaceae) with functionally diverse pollinators.Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsIn comparison to pollinating insects and non-flying mammals (NFMs), nectarivorous birds might display behaviours leading to greater pollen carryover. Therefore, plants pollinated by birds might display higher levels of paternal diversity and outcrossing than those pollinated by insects and NFMs, with associated fitness benefits for seeds and seedlings. Here, we test these predictions using a plant where birds, insects and NFMs are all frequent visitors to flowers.
methodsAn experiment manipulating access to flowers of Banksia menziesii (Proteaceae) was conducted. Treatments applied to whole plants were: (1) open to all pollinators; (2) insect access, with birds and NFMs excluded; (3) NFM access, with insects and birds excluded; and (4) complete pollinator exclusion. Reproductive output was quantified in terms of fruit and seed production. The genetic consequences for offspring were tested using microsatellite markers to genotype individuals and quantify the mating system, and through field trials to quantify seedling vigour. KEY
resultsWhen birds were excluded from flowers, maternal fitness was reduced. In comparison to open pollinated flowers, fruit set was reduced by 76 % when only NFMs could access flowers. When only insects (primarily introduced honeybees) could access flowers, the number of viable seeds per fruit was reduced by 20 % because the proportion of aborted seeds doubled, in comparison to pollination that included birds. For seedlings, heterozygosity was reduced by 22 %, outcrossing rates by 30 % and paternal diversity by 15 %, when birds were excluded. Seedling mortality was strongly associated with inbreeding, and selfing largely occurred only when birds were excluded. All parameters were lowest when only NFMs had access to flowers.
conclusionsAlthough honeybees were effective pollinators of B. menziesii owing to their abundance, birds were inferred to be the most effective, with their exclusion resulting in a reduction of fecundity and offspring vigour. These negative effects were largely a consequence of selection against the products of self-pollination, which was associated with pollination by insects or NFMs. Our findings highlight how a genetic component of pollination that increases offspring fitness could favour the evolution of bird pollination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.