The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Specialization on traits as basis for the niche‐breadth of flower visitors and as structuring mechanism of ecological networks
Abstract
Summary: Biotic interactions do not occur in isolation but are imbedded in a network of species interactions. Network analysis facilitates the compilation and understanding of the complexity found in natural ecosystems and is a powerful tool to reveal information on the degree of specialization of the interacting partners and their niches. The indices measuring these properties are based on qualitative or quantitative observations of interactions between partners from different trophic levels, which informs about the structure of network patterns, but not about the underlying mechanisms. Functional traits may control the interaction strength between partners and also the (micro‐) structure of networks. Here, we ask whether flower visitors specialize on certain plant traits and how this trait specialization contributes to niche partitioning and interaction partner diversity. We introduce two novel statistical approaches suited to evaluate the dimension of the realized niche and to analyse which traits determine niches. As basis for our analysis, we measured 10 quantitative flower traits and evaluated whether 31 arthropod taxa i visited flowers displaying only subsets of the available trait characteristics, indicating a specialization on these traits by narrow trait‐widths〈Si〉. The product of 10 trait‐ and species‐specific trait‐widths〈Si〉 was defined as trait‐volume Vi(expansion of a n‐dimensional hypervolume) occupied by each taxon i. These indices are applicable beyond flower–visitor interactions to quantify realized niches based on various biotic and abiotic factors. Each flower visitor species showed some degree of specialization to a unique set of flower traits (realized niche). Overall, our data suggested a hierarchical sequence of flower traits influencing the flower visitors' behaviour and thus network structure: flowering phenology was found to have the strongest effect, followed by flower height, nectar‐tube depth and floral reflectance. Less important were pollen‐mass/flower, sugar/flower, anther position, phylogeny, display size and abundance. The species‐specific specialization on traits suggests that plant communities with more diverse floral niches may sustain a larger number of flower visitors with non‐redundant fundamental niches. Our study and statistical approach provide a basis for a better understanding of how plant traits shape interactions between flowers and their visitors and thus network structure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers
Potts, S. G., Biesmeijer, J. C., Kremen, C., Neumann, P., Schweiger, O., & Kunin, W. E. (2010) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007 · Cited by 6,458
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1957.022.01.039 · Cited by 6,228
Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits
MCGILL, B., ENQUIST, B., WEIHER, E., & WESTOBY, M. (2006) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.02.002 · Cited by 4,631
Principles of Pollination Ecology
(1979) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-00736-3 · Cited by 3,555
Parallel Declines in Pollinators and Insect-Pollinated Plants in Britain and the Netherlands
Biesmeijer, J. C., Roberts, S. P. M., Reemer, M., Ohlemüller, R., Edwards, M., Peeters, T., Schaffers, A. P., Potts, S. G., Kleukers, R., Thomas, C. D., et al. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1127863 · Cited by 3,189
The modularity of pollination networks
Olesen, J. M., Bascompte, J., Dupont, Y. L., & Jordano, P. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0706375104 · Cited by 2,639
Measuring specialization in species interaction networks.
Blüthgen, N., Menzel, F., & Blüthgen, N. (2006) · BMC Ecology · doi:10.1186/1472-6785-6-9 · Cited by 1,489
Self-citationT HE E VOLUTION OF C OLOR V ISION IN I NSECTS
Briscoe, A. D., & Chittka, L. (2001) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.46.1.471 · Cited by 1,415
Review: Ecological networks – beyond food webs
Ings, T. C., Montoya, J. M., Bascompte, J., Blüthgen, N., Brown, L., Dormann, C. F., Edwards, F., Figueroa, D., Jacob, U., Jones, J. I., et al. (2009) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01460.x · Cited by 934
Self-citation
Cited by
Schleuning, M., Fründ, J., & García, D. (2015) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.00983 · Cited by 340
Functional flower traits and their diversity drive pollinator visitation
Fornoff, F., Klein, A., Hartig, F., Benadi, G., Venjakob, C., Schaefer, H. M., & Ebeling, A. (2017) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/oik.03869 · Cited by 135
Self-citationDainese, M., Isaac, N. J. B., Powney, G. D., Bommarco, R., Öckinger, E., Kuussaari, M., Pöyry, J., Benton, T. G., Gabriel, D., Hodgson, J. A., et al. (2017) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.13601 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Junker, R. R., Blüthgen, N., Brehm, T., Binkenstein, J., Paulus, J., Martin Schaefer, H., & Stang, M.
- Venue
- Functional Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-12-13
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 329-341
- ISSN
- 0269-8463 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2435
- OpenAlex
- W2154894777
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 13.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Specialization on traits as basis for the niche‐breadth of flower visitors and as structuring mechanism of ecological networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1365-2435.12005
- The paper
- Junker, R. R., Blüthgen, N., Brehm, T., Binkenstein, J., Paulus, J., Martin Schaefer, H., & Stang, M. (2013). Specialization on traits as basis for the niche‐breadth of flower visitors and as structuring mechanism of ecological networks. Functional Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.