A sit‐and‐wait predator, but not an active‐pursuit predator, alters pollinator‐mediated selection on floral traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indirect species interactions are ubiquitous in nature, often outnumbering direct species interactions. Yet despite evidence that indirect interactions have strong ecological effects, relatively little is known about whether they can shape adaptive evolution by altering the strength and/or direction of natural selection. We tested whether indirect interactions affect the strength and direction of pollinator-mediated selection on floral traits of the bumble-bee pollinated wildflower Lobelia siphilitica. We estimated the indirect effects of two pollinator predators with contrasting hunting modes: dragonflies (Aeshnidae and Corduliidae) and ambush bugs (Phymata americana, Reduviidae). Because dragonflies are active pursuit predators, we hypothesized that they would strengthen pollinator-mediated selection by weakening plant-pollinator interactions (i.e., a density-mediated indirect effect). In contrast, because ambush bugs are sit-and-wait predators, we hypothesized that they would weaken or reverse the direction of pollinator-mediated selection by altering pollinator foraging behavior (i.e., a trait-mediated indirect effect). Specifically, if ambush bugs hunt from plants with traits that attract pollinators (i.e., prey), then pollinators will spend less time visiting those plants, weakening or reversing the direction of selection on attractive floral traits. We did not find evidence that high dragonfly abundance strengthened selection on floral traits via a density-mediated indirect effect: neither pollen limitation (a proxy for the strength of plant-pollinator interactions) nor directional selection on floral traits of L. siphilitica differed significantly between high- and low-dragonfly abundance treatments. In contrast, we did find evidence that ambush bug presence affected selection on floral traits via a trait-mediated indirect effect: ambush bugs hunted from L. siphilitica plants with larger daily floral displays, reversing the direction of pollinator-mediated selection on daily display size. These results suggest that indirect species interactions have the potential to shape adaptive evolution by altering natural selection.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".