MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168092885 · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13726

The role of plant–pollinator interactions in structuring nectar microbial communities

2021· article· en· W3168092885 on OpenAlexaff
Clara de Vega, Sergio Álvarez‐Pérez, Rafael G. Albaladejo, Sandy‐Lynn Steenhuisen, Marc‐André Lachance, Steven D. Johnson, Carlos M. Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónBanco Bilbao Vizcaya ArgentariaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadNational Research FoundationFundación BBVA
KeywordsPollinatorNectarGuildBiologySpecies richnessMicrobiomeEcologyPhylogenetic diversityBiodiversityPollinationPhylogeneticsHabitatPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Floral nectar harbours a diverse microbiome of yeasts and bacteria that depend predominantly on animal visitors for their dispersal. Since pollinators visit specific sets of flowers and carry their own unique microbiota, we hypothesize that plant species visited by the same set of pollinators may support non‐random nectar microbial communities linked together by the type of pollinator. Here we explore the importance of plant–pollinator interactions in the assembly of nectar microbiome and study the role of plant geographic location as a determinant of microbial community composition. We intensively sampled the nectar of 282 flowers of 48 plant species with beetles, birds, long‐tongued and short‐tongued insects as pollinators in wild populations in South Africa, one of the world's biodiversity hotspots, and using molecular techniques we identified nectar yeast and bacteria taxa. The analyses provided new insights into the richness, geographic structure and phylogenetic characterization of nectar microbiome, and compared patterns of composition of bacteria and yeast communities in relation to plant and pollinator guild. Our results showed that plant–pollinator interactions played a crucial role in shaping nectar microbial communities. Plants visited by different pollinator guilds supported significantly different yeast and bacterial communities. The pollinator guild also contributed to the maintenance of beta diversity and phylogenetic microbial segregation. The results revealed different patterns for yeast and bacteria; whereas plants visited by beetles supported the highest richness and phylogenetic diversity of yeasts, bacteria communities were significantly more diverse in plants visited by other insect groups. We found no clear microbial spatial segregation at different geographical scales for bacteria, and only the phylogenetic similarity of yeast composition was correlated significantly with geography. Synthesis . Interactions of animal vector, plant host traits and microbe physiology contribute to microbial community assemblages in nectar. Our results suggest that plants visited by the same pollinator guild have a characteristic nectar microbiota signature that may transcends the geographic region they are in. Contrasted patterns for yeast and bacteria stress the need for future work aimed at better understanding the causes and consequences of the importance of plants and pollinators in shaping nectar microbial communities in nature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207