↓ Skip to main content

Competition for pollination: effects of pollen of an invasive plant on seed set of a native congener

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, September 2001
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
221 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
340 Mendeley
Title
Competition for pollination: effects of pollen of an invasive plant on seed set of a native congener
Published in
Oecologia, September 2001
DOI 10.1007/s004420100700
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beverly J. Brown, Randall J. Mitchell

Abstract

Competition for pollination can be an important factor in plant reproduction, but little attention has been given to the effect of the growing number of invasive plant species on pollination of native species. As a first step in understanding this threat, we used hand pollination to investigate the effects of pollen from an invasive species (Lythrum salicaria) on seed set in a sympatric and co-flowering native congener (L. alatum). Dispersal of fluorescent dyes in the field confirms that pollinators (bumble bees and honey bees) transfer pollen between species. To determine the potential effect of such interspecific pollen transfer on seed set of the native, we pollinated 773 flowers on 20 plants with one of three treatments: legitimate conspecific pollen, a mixture of conspecific and foreign pollen, and foreign pollen. The mixed-pollen treatment resulted in 28.8% lower seed set relative to conspecific pollination. Foreign crosses resulted in extremely low seed set. Observations of pollen germination indicate that events at the stigmatic surface contribute to the reduction in seed set for mixed pollination. Our results indicate that the impacts of invasive species may extend beyond vegetative competition to include competition for pollination.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 340 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 4%
Brazil 6 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Spain 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 290 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 68 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 18%
Student > Master 57 17%
Student > Bachelor 31 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 20 6%
Other 67 20%
Unknown 37 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 216 64%
Environmental Science 65 19%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 <1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 43 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2002.
All research outputs
#7,521,897
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,680
of 4,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,023
of 38,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#9
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,226 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 38,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.