Abstract
Abstract Climate change alters environmental conditions in ways that directly and indirectly affect plants. Flowering plants, for example, modify reproductive allocation in response to heat and drought stress, and such changes can in turn affect pollinator visitation and, ultimately, plant reproduction. Although the individual effects of warming and drought on plant reproductive allocation are well known, these factors may interact to influence reproduction. Here, we conducted a fully crossed temperature by irrigation manipulation in squash ( Cucurbita pepo ) to test how temperature and soil moisture variation affect pollinator‐mediated reproduction. To tease apart the direct and indirect effects of temperature and soil moisture, we compared hand‐pollinated plants to bee‐pollinated plants and restricted bee foraging (i.e., pollen transfer) to one experimental group per day. Temperature and soil‐moisture limitation acted independently of one another: warming decreased flower size and increased pollen production, whereas the effects of soil‐moisture limitation were uniformly inhibitory. While treatments did not change squash bee ( Xenoglossa spp.) behavior, floral visitation by the honey bee ( Apis mellifera ) increased with temperature in male flowers and decreased with soil moisture in female flowers. Pollen deposition by bees was independent of plant soil moisture, yet reducing soil moisture increased pollen limitation. This result stemmed at least in part from the effects of soil‐moisture limitation on pollen viability; seed set declined with increasing deposition of fluorescent pigment (a proxy for pollen) from plants experiencing decreased soil moisture. These findings suggest that the transfer of lower‐quality pollen from plants experiencing soil‐moisture limitation led to drought‐induced pollen limitation. Similar effects may occur in a wide variety of flowering plant species as climate warming and drought increasingly impact animal‐pollinated systems.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 10
Claim · model-written summary
Warming decreased squash flower size.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“warming decreased flower size and increased pollen production”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Warming increased squash pollen production.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“warming decreased flower size and increased pollen production”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil moisture limitation had uniformly inhibitory effects on squash reproduction.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“the effects of soil‐moisture limitation were uniformly inhibitory”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
The treatments did not change squash bee behavior.
- Taxon
- squashe1
- Treatment
- treatmentse0
- Interactor
- squash bee ( Xenoglossa spp.)Xenoglossae0pollinator
- Outcome
- squash bee ( Xenoglossa spp.) behaviore0
- Direction
- did not changee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“treatments did not change squash bee ( Xenoglossa spp.) behavior”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Honey bee visitation to male squash flowers increased with temperature.
- Taxon
- squashe1
- Organ / stage
- male flowerse0
- Treatment
- temperaturee0
- Interactor
- honey bee ( Apis mellifera )
_Apis_mellifera_(female)_-_on_viburnum_tinus_flowers.jpg?width=60)
Apis melliferae0pollinator - Outcome
- floral visitation by the honey bee ( Apis mellifera )e0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Apis_mellifera_(female)_-_on_viburnum_tinus_flowers.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“floral visitation by the honey bee ( Apis mellifera ) increased with temperature in male flowers”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Honey bee visitation to female squash flowers decreased with soil moisture.
- Taxon
- squashe1
- Organ / stage
- female flowerse0
- Treatment
- soil moisturee0
- Interactor
- honey bee ( Apis mellifera )Apis melliferae0pollinator
- Outcome
- floral visitation by the honey bee ( Apis mellifera )e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“floral visitation by the honey bee ( Apis mellifera ) increased with temperature in male flowers and decreased with soil moisture in female flowers”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Bee pollen deposition was independent of squash soil moisture.
Verbatim
e0“Pollen deposition by bees was independent of plant soil moisture”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced squash soil moisture increased pollen limitation.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“reducing soil moisture increased pollen limitation”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
Squash seed set declined with increasing pollen-proxy pigment deposition from plants under reduced soil moisture.
Verbatim
e0“seed set declined with increasing deposition of fluorescent pigment (a proxy for pollen) from plants experiencing decreased soil moisture”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors infer that transfer of lower-quality pollen under soil moisture limitation causes squash pollen limitation.
Verbatim
e0“the transfer of lower‐quality pollen from plants experiencing soil‐moisture limitation led to drought‐induced pollen limitation”
e1“squash ( Cucurbita pepo )”
The same questions in other papers
heat · growth · Cucurbita (pumpkins)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- negative
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.