ArticlePlant biology (Stuttgart, Germany)2026
Resilience of floral scent emission after florivory.
Article in Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany), 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Throughout evolutionary time, florivory has always represented an important source of selective pressure on flower evolution. When feeding, florivores remove corolla portions and undoubtedly change floral visual traits; however, we are in the early stages of understanding the effects of florivory on floral olfactory signalling. Florivores may jeopardize floral scent emission by feeding on flower parts responsible for volatile synthesis/emission, or by inducing plant physiological responses that alter floral scent. Thus, after florivory, flowers may no longer attract pollinators or might even repel them due to local short-term changes in floral scent emission. Here, we investigate whether damage by florivores alters the amount and composition of floral scent. We describe natural florivory patterns and anatomically characterize the corolla portions potentially involved in scent emission in seven plant species pollinated by bees, hummingbirds, hawkmoths, or butterflies, which have diverse florivores, in a neotropical savanna. Moreover, we performed natural experiments to test whether florivory leads to short-term local changes in floral scent phenotype. We found that even when florivores consumed 15% of the corolla portions with anatomical scent-emitting features, there was no reduction in total amount of floral scent, except in a hawkmoth-pollinated species, which showed a reduction in scent emission although only 3% of the osmophore-bearing areas were consumed. Florivory did not affect scent composition in any species. Our data suggest a stability in post-florivory scent emission, which may guarantee the maintenance of pollinator visitation regardless of florivory, indicating a resilience of natural systems with multiple and simultaneous interactions.
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.