Pollen Transport Networks Help Reveal the Importance of Dipteran Pollinators in Coastal Plant Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The contribution of dipterans to pollination in tropical communities has been scarcely studied. Although some studies have evaluated dipteran pollination in crops and wild species, limited attention has been paid to their role in pollination networks. In particular, their role in pollen transport has been neglected. Integrating their role as floral visitors and their importance in pollen transport through interaction networks may help reveal their importance in pollination in tropical co‐flowering communities. We constructed visitation and pollen transport networks from the analysis of pollen carried on dipteran bodies in two tropical coastal communities to test the prediction that pollen transport networks would reveal fewer but more specialised interactions than visitation networks. We estimated parameters describing the network topology and the main estimators of the roles of each species. We recorded 1372 floral visits and counted 46,001 pollen grains. Our results showed that the visitation and pollen transport networks exhibited similar pollination network structures (e.g., nestedness, specialisation, and modularity). However, the pollen transport network suggested a higher level of specialisation between dipterans and plants in both communities. In addition, the networks' modular structure suggested contrasting species grouping according to network type. Moreover, most dipterans were classified as peripheral species in pollen transport networks, suggesting high within‐module interactions. Although some estimators of dipteran role through visitation (nestedness contribution and resource range) can be used as indicators of pollen transport, we found that pollen transport is a better descriptor of dipteran specialisation or the role of the species in the modular structure of the network. This work is the first to explore the importance of dipterans using visitation and pollen transport data in the tropics. Overall, our results suggest that a better understanding of the dipteran's importance in pollination networks is necessary to add information on their role in pollen transport.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".