4.5 Article

SPECIALIZATION CLINES IN THE POLLINATION SYSTEMS OF AGAVES (AGAVACEAE) AND COLUMNAR CACTI (CACTACEAE): A PHYLOGENETICALLY CONTROLLED META-ANALYSIS

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 96, 期 10, 页码 1887-1895

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.0800392

关键词

Agavaceae; agave; Cactaceae; columnar cactus; comparative method; generalization; meta-analysis; phylogenetic meta-analysis; pollen limitation; pollination system; specialization

资金

  1. CONACyT [167292]
  2. Bat Conservation International (BCI)
  3. Department of Applied Ecology, INECOL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The biogeography of plant-animal interactions is a novel topic on which many disciplines converge (e.g., reproductive biology, biogeography, and evolutionary biology). Narrative reviews have indicated that tropical columnar cacti and agaves have highly pollination systems, while extratropical species have generalized systems. However, this dichotomy has never been quantitatively tested. We tested this hypothesis using traditional and phylogenetically informed meta-analysis. Three effect sizes were estimated from the literature: diurnal, nocturnal, and hand cross-pollination (an indicator of pollen limitation). Columnar cactus pollination systems ranged from purely bat-pollinated in the tropics to generalized pollination, with diurnal visitors as effective as nocturnal visitors in extratropical regions; even when phylogenetic relatedness among species is taken into account. Metaregressions identified a latitudinal increase in pollen limitation in columnar cacti, but this increase was not significant after correcting for phylogeny. The currently available data for agaves do not Support any latitudinal trend. Nectar production Of columnar cacti varied with latitude. Although this variation is positively correlated with pollination by diurnal visitors, it is influenced by phylogeny. The degree of specificity in the pollination systems of columnar cacti is heavily influenced by ecological factors and has a predictable geographic pattern.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据