By land and by tree: Pollinator taxa diversity of terrestrial and epiphytic orchids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are approximately 30,000 species in the family Orchidaceae, with some species growing terrestrially and others growing as epiphytes. Though the pollination biology of many of these species is not well known, there has been a diversity of taxa recorded as orchid pollinators. Insects, birds, and even a record of a mammal species have been documented as successful pollinators, while some orchids are able to reproduce without the use of a pollen vector. The goal of this review is to provide an overview of orchid pollination tactics, with references to more specific studies of each, and to analyze a large subset of publications to determine differences in pollinator taxa and specificity between epiphytic and terrestrial orchid genera. This review examines pollination data from over 400 orchid species, including 74 epiphytic and 83 terrestrial orchid genera. Two pollinator taxa, Coleoptera and Hymenoptera (Class: Insecta), were found to pollinate significantly more terrestrial than epiphytic orchid genera, while other taxa showed no significant differences. Hymenoptera were the dominant taxa of pollinator in regards to the overall number of species recorded; however, based on species interaction webs that were built, the Lepidoptera (Class: Insecta) have stronger interactions with the orchid species they pollinate, suggesting a more specific relationship between the two.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".