Pollination ecology in the tropical Andes: moving towards a cross‐scale approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant-pollinator interactions structure ecological communities and represent a key component of ecosystem functioning. Pollination networks are expected to be more diverse and specialised in the tropics, but pollination ecology in these regions has been understudied in comparison to other areas. We reviewed research on pollination in the tropical Andes, one of the major biodiversity hotspots on Earth, where the uplift of mountains and past climate have resulted in spatiotemporally distinct species interactions. We found 1010 scientific articles on pollination in the Andes, of which 473 included or were carried out in tropical regions. The number of publications on pollination ecology in the tropical Andes has increased exponentially, with Colombia having the most articles, followed by Ecuador and Peru, and with Bolivia and Venezuela having notably fewer studies. More research has been carried out in humid montane forests and agricultural landscapes, and it has predominantly focused on describing diversity of species and interactions while neglecting analyses on the resilience and adaptability of pollinating systems, even though the Andean region is particularly susceptible to the effects of climate change and continues to undergo land conversion and degradation. Remarkably few studies have incorporated local knowledge, thus ignoring connections to human livelihoods and communities. A phytocentric perspective has been predominant, with fewer studies focusing directly on pollinators and a notable lack of articles with a holistic approach to the study of pollination across taxonomic groups at the community or ecosystem level. We propose that future research adopts a cross-scale approach that considers the complexity of the ecological contexts in which plant-pollinator interactions occur, and incorporates long-term monitoring with broader multilayer networks and molecular tools, experiments focused on ecophysiology and behaviour, animal telemetry, process-modelling approaches and participatory science. A stronger field driven by interdisciplinary collaborations will contribute to knowledge about pollination at a global scale, as well as increase our understanding of the diversity and resilience of pollination interactions in this region, thus improving our capacity to predict and avoid ecosystem collapses.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".