ArticleJournal of plant research2026
Pollen-pistil interaction and asymmetric reproductive interference in Veronica species.
Article in Journal of plant research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Reproductive interference is a negative interspecific interaction that can drive mutually exclusive distributions of closely related species. While recent research indicates that reproductive interference in plants frequently occurs during pollen-pistil interactions, comprehensive descriptions of these interactions are scarce. Understanding the mechanisms underlying reproductive interference requires studies integrating empirical observations with interaction analyses. This study investigates pollen-pistil interactions between three Veronica species recently observed to exhibit asymmetric reproductive interference.Our experiments revealed similar pollen tube behavior in V. polita var. lilacina and V. cymbalaria pistils, irrespective of whether they were pollinated with conspecific or V. persica pollen. Conversely, in V. persica pistils, the number of pollen tubes significantly decreased following heterospecific pollination compared to conspecific pollination. Furthermore, half of the pollen grains on V. persica stigmas, presumably heterospecific pollen grains, occasionally appeared non-luminous under the fluorescence microscope after mixed pollination. Conspecific pollen tubes appeared to grow faster within V. persica pistils; however, statistical analysis did not support this trend.These results suggest that V. polita var. lilacina and V. cymbalaria pistils exhibit limited discrimination against V. persica pollen, resulting in ovule discounting by the heterospecific pollen. This mechanism explains the empirical observation that these species experience reduced seed set after mixed pollination, even when conspecific pollen is applied first. In contrast, V. persica pistils demonstrate a degree of discrimination between conspecific and heterospecific pollen, particularly when conspecific pollen arrives on the stigma prior to heterospecific pollen. This selectivity accounts for the empirical findings that V. persica exhibits reduced seed set only when surrounded by V. polita var lilacina or after mixed pollination with V. cymbalaria pollen preceding conspecific pollen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41276765What 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.