ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Bee Body Size and Foraging Behavior Predict the Pollination Role of Bees in a Buzz-Pollinated Plant Community.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-flowering with congeners does not affect buzz-pollinator specialization and pollination performance in Rhexia mariana, but does affect floral trait variance.American journal of botany · 2025Article
- Bee Body Size and Foraging Behavior Predict the Pollination Role of Bees in a Buzz-Pollinated Plant Community.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Buzz pollination has been studied for over a century, yet the drivers shaping plant-pollinator interactions at the community level remain poorly understood. Although previous research has identified key functional traits associated with sonication-foraging behavior and taxonomic relationships among floral visitors, the specific bee traits that promote effective pollination are still unclear. In this study, we investigated which morphological and behavioral characteristics of flower-visiting bees predict pollination success within a plant community containing multiple buzz-pollinated species. Focusing on eight co-occurring, co-flowering plant species with poricidal anthers, we measured stigma contact (as a proxy for pollination efficiency), visitation rates, flower and whole plant handling time, intertegular span (body size), and pollen extraction mode across different bee species. Our results showed that both morphological and behavioral traits can predict pollination success. Specifically, stigma contact was positively associated with larger body size, suggesting that larger bees are more likely to touch the stigma during visits. In contrast, longer flower and plant handling times were linked to a low likelihood of stigma contacts-traits more commonly observed in smaller bees. Bees that used floral sonication visited more flowers and plants per unit time and contacted stigmas approximately four times more frequently than non-sonicating bees. However, detailed aspects of sonication behavior-such as the number and duration of buzzes-were not associated with pollination efficiency. These findings suggest that while bees visiting buzz-pollinated flowers may share similar pollen extraction mechanisms, variation in physical and behavioral traits plays a crucial role in shaping pollination dynamics.
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.