ArticleAmerican journal of botany2025
Co-flowering with congeners does not affect buzz-pollinator specialization and pollination performance in Rhexia mariana, but does affect floral trait variance.
Article in American journal of botany, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Forecasts of climate-driven habitat suitability distribution are complicated by taxonomic and cytogenetic complexity inAoB PLANTS · 2026Article
- Rapid disruption of pollination function by the invasive plant Impatiens glandulifera.Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany) · 2026Article
- Ecological change may be a common initiator of evolutionary pollinator shifts.The New phytologist · 2026Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
premisePollinator-mediated plant-plant interactions may be negative (i.e., competition, reproductive interference) or positive (i.e., facilitation). Especially when co-flowering with close relatives (e.g., congeners), negative interactions through reproductive interference may be strong and result in floral trait divergence and increased pollination niche partitioning. However, when pollination services are limited, positive effects of pollinator sharing through floral trait similarity may outweigh the costs of reproductive interference. We therefore tested for evidence of negative or positive pollinator-mediated plant-plant interactions across a gradient of varying congeneric co-flowering contexts in the genus Rhexia (Melastomataceae).
methodsWe studied pollinator interactions, pollination performance and floral traits of Rhexia mariana across nine localities of varying cogeneric co-flowering contexts (up to seven Rhexia species co-flowering) in central Florida, USA.
resultsRegardless of co-flowering context, differential pollinator specialization was weak, with Bombus impatiens visiting all Rhexia species, removing pollen through buzz-pollination. Co-flowering context did not affect visitation rates or pollination performance, but the floral traits of R. mariana differed signficantly and were less variable in low compared to high co-flowering contexts.
conclusionsWe did not find support for either negative or positive effects of co-flowering on pollination performance in Rhexia mariana, indicating that co-flowering may instead have neutral effects. Negative effects of co-flowering with close relatives hence do not seem to be strong enough to drive specialization on distinct buzzing bee pollinators in Rhexia. Sampling across more localities, paired with experimental approaches (e.g., manipulating co-flowering density, assessing post-zygotic reproductive barriers) will be essential to clarify whether reproductive interference through co-flowering is indeed low.
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.