Volatile Organic Compounds Role in Selective Pollinator Visits to Commercial Melon Types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pollination is essential for food production in the world, but in pollinator-dependent crops it relies on the attraction of pollinators to flowers. However, crop varieties vary in their attractiveness to flower visitors and volatile compounds emitted by flowers may play a significant role in attracting or repelling pollinators. Here, we investigated the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) present in both male and hermaphrodite flowers of five commercial types of melon Cucumis melo (Cantaloupe, Charentais, Galia, Piel de sapo and Yellow), and their role in attracting or repelling Apis mellifera foragers. We found significant variation in the identity and proportion of these chemical compounds produced by both melon types and flower genders and observed significant positive and negative correlations between the amount of D-Limonene and Benzaldehyde (bee attractants) and α-Pinene (bee repellent), respectively, to the number of bee visits to flowers particularly in the Cantaloupe type and hermaphrodite flowers, the most visited ones. Our results suggest that differences in the composition of melon floral VOCs and the proportion of the different compounds play significant role in the number of visits by A. mellifera with possible implications to pollination and fruit yield. It also implies to the perspective of breeding varieties more attractive to pollinators through the selection of flower lines richer in bee-attractant and/or poorer in bee-repellent volatiles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".