Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41358430›Full record

ArticleEcology2025

Seasonal climate drives population growth but not costs of reproduction of a perennial wildflower.

Jenna A Loesberg, Jennifer L Williams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jenna A LoesbergDepartment of Geography and Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0763-4079
Jennifer L WilliamsDepartment of Geography and Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4497-4961

Funding

British Columbia Knowledge Development FundCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Resource Council of Canada (NSERC)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Costs of reproduction are predicted to shift under climate change, but the extent to which weaker or stronger costs influence population responses to interannual climate variation is unknown. We asked how seasonal climate, manipulated rainfall, and costs of reproduction influence vital rates and population growth in a long-lived herbaceous perennial plant, Primula hendersonii, across an ongoing rainfall manipulation experiment in oak savanna of northwestern North America. Simulated drought reduced population growth rates, and vital rates (e.g., probability of flowering, individual growth) responded individualistically to variation in winter, spring, and summer temperatures, although not to variation in seasonal precipitation. However, only warmer spring temperatures were associated with a decline in population growth rates. Although we observed a weak negative effect of past reproduction on growth and future reproduction for large individuals, these costs of reproduction ultimately did not influence population growth. Further, observational and manipulative experiments to detect costs of reproduction suggest subtle differences in cost expression. We show that direct climate drivers had a stronger effect on population growth than indirect changes in costs of reproduction and may be more important for understanding population persistence under climate change.

Indexed as

ClimateClimate ChangeSeasonsPopulation GrowthReproductionTime Factorsclimate driversdemographydroughtGarry oak savannaintegral projection modelirrigationPrimula hendersoniirainfall manipulationreproductive effort

Identifiers

PMID41358430
PMCPMC12683621

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.