ArticleAmerican journal of botany2026
Genetic distance and pollinator sharing shape divergence in floral volatiles in closely related dioecious Ficus species.
Article in American journal of botany, 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
premiseFloral scent is central to host recognition in the fig-fig wasp mutualism, yet how scent divergence relates to pollinator sharing among closely related dioecious Ficus species remains unclear.
methodsWe analyzed volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from four pairs of closely related Ficus species that have different levels of pollinator sharing (complete, partial, or none). Floral scent profiles were compared using multivariate analyses, and their relationship with genetic distance was evaluated using a Mantel test.
resultsFloral scent profiles differed among species and were shaped by both genetic relatedness and pollinator sharing. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination revealed clear clustering of species based on scent composition, and a PERMANOVA revealed significant interspecific differences, except between F. auriculata and F. oligodon, which share pollinators and have similar VOC profiles. In general, species pairs that share pollinators had greater similarity in scent composition than those that did not, although this pattern was not universal. Floral scent similarity declined with increasing genetic distance (Mantel test: r = -0.39, P = 0.041), indicating that closely related species tend to have more similar scent profiles.
conclusionsFloral scent similarity is partly associated with pollinator sharing in closely related Ficus species, but this relationship is not consistent and likely depends on additional factors, including genetic divergence and ecological context. Overall, floral scent variation reflects the combined influence of evolutionary history and ecological processes. Broader taxonomic sampling and functional analyses of pollinator responses are needed to further clarify these relationships.
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.