Interspecific variation in nectar and pollen reward among plant species commonly planted to support pollinators

Clicks: 4
ID: 332152
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #27 of 27 articles by views in AoB PLANTS

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Background and Aims Pollinators facilitate the reproduction of most wild plants. Declines in pollinator populations have led to interest in establishing floral enhancements to support them. However, knowledge about how food rewards vary across plant species planted to support pollinators remains scant. Methods Using a greenhouse common garden, we quantified nectar volume, nectar sucrose, and pollen protein quantity for 11 species commonly planted to support pollinators in Mediterranean climates. We evaluated if variation was explained by life history and the potential for tradeoffs between nectar and pollen quality. Key Results There was high variation in nectar and moderate variation in pollen protein across species. The probability of producing nectar was higher for perennial plants. For flowers that contained nectar, there were no differences between annual and perennial plants in nectar traits. The species that produced the highest quality nectar (Scrophularia californica) produced pollen with the lowest protein amounts, and the species that produced the lowest quality nectar (Madia elegans) produced pollen with the highest protein amounts. There was no statistical association between pollen protein amounts and nectar traits across species. Conclusions The nutrition pollinators obtain from foraging on most species studied here may come primarily in the form of carbohydrates or protein, but not both. However, one species (Epilobium canum) produced both high-quality nectar and pollen, so identifying others that produce similarly broad, high-quality rewards would be worthwhile. Our results also suggest that including perennial plants in pollinator gardens will facilitate pollinator acquisition of carbohydrates.
Reference Key
openalex_W7221541553 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Maddie Gregor, Wendy Lei, Adelaide Ergastolo, Sevan S. Suni
Journal AoB PLANTS
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/aobpla/plag049
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.