Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41942748›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2026

Pollination and dispersal networks in the Amazonian tree flora.

Hans Ter Steege, Caio S Ballarin, Carlos Eduardo Pinto, Lorena B Valadão-Mendes, Pablo Stevenson, Diego F Correa, Tereza Cristina Giannini, Vitor H F Gomes, Matt McGlone, Renato A F de Lima

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

10 authors.

Hans Ter SteegeNaturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, PO Box 9517, 2300 RA, The Netherlands. hans.tersteege@naturalis.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8738-2659
Caio S BallarinLaboratório de Ecologia da Polinização e Interações - LEPI, Departamento de Biodiversidade e Bioestatística, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Estadual Paulista 'Júlio de Mesquita Filho' (IBB - UNESP), Rua Prof. Dr Antonio Celso Wagner Zanin, Botucatu, SP, CEP 18618-689, Brazil.
Carlos Eduardo PintoDepartamento de Ciências Biológicas, ESALQ, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, Avenida Pádua Dias, 11, CEP 13418-900, Piracicaba, Brazil.
Lorena B Valadão-MendesPrograma de Pós-graduação em Biologia Animal, Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina, MG, Brazil.
Pablo StevensonLaboratorio de Ecología de Bosques Tropicales y Primatología, Universidad de los Andes, Carrera 1 # 18a- 10, Bogotá, DC, 111711, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2394-447X
Diego F CorreaLaboratorio de Ecología de Bosques Tropicales y Primatología, Universidad de los Andes, Carrera 1 # 18a- 10, Bogotá, DC, 111711, Colombia.
Tereza Cristina GianniniInstituto Tecnológico Vale, Rua Boaventura de Silva 955, Belém, Pará, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9830-1204
Vitor H F GomesDepartment of Biology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3855-5584
Matt McGloneManaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, PO Box 69040, Lincoln, 7640, New Zealand.
Renato A F de LimaDepartamento de Ciências Biológicas, ESALQ, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, Avenida Pádua Dias, 11, CEP 13418-900, Piracicaba, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1048-0138

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We collected flower-visiting data for 5,201 Amazonian trees species, corresponding to 50% of all known tree species and 94% of all estimated individuals in Amazonia. Bees are the most common flower-visitors responsible for 74% of all studied tree genera and 74.1% of all individual trees, followed by generalist flower-visitors (39.2%). Sixteen tree genera make up 50% of all interactions between tree genera and their flower-visitors. Two of those: Inga, Miconia, each provide more than 2% of all interactions at genus level while six: Protium, Eschweilera, Inga, Pouteria, Ocotea, and Virola each provide more than 2% of all interactions at the estimated tree population level, underscoring the importance of these tree genera in the forest. Forty hyperdominant genera are responsible for half of the fruit resources of the Amazonian disperser community. Nearly 80% of these Amazonian tree species rely on animals for both pollination and seed dispersal, and less than 1% are free from animal involvement in these key life stages. This strong biotic dependence highlights a critical point: animal-mediated interactions are not peripheral but central to the maintenance, regeneration, and spatial structure of Amazonian forests, which makes halting of defaunation in these forests a priority.

Indexed as

PollinationSeed DispersalTreesAnimalsBeesBrazilFlowersForests

Identifiers

PMID41942748
PMCPMC13053718

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.