The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Florivory: the intersection of pollination and herbivory
Abstract
Plants interact with many visitors who consume a variety of plant tissues. While the consequences of herbivory to leaves and shoots are well known, the implications of florivory, the consumption of flowers prior to seed coat formation, have received less attention. Herbivory and florivory can yield different plant, population and community outcomes; thus, it is critical to distinguish between these two types of consumption. Here, we consider the ecological and evolutionary consequences of florivory. A growing number of studies recognize that florivory is common in natural systems and in some cases surpasses leaf herbivory in magnitude and impact. Florivores can affect male and female plant fitness via direct trophic effects and through altered pathways of species interactions. In particular, florivory can affect pollination and have consequences for plant mating and floral sexual system evolution. Plants are not defenceless against florivore damage. Concepts of resistance and tolerance can be applied to plant–florivore interactions. Moreover, extant theories of plant chemical defence, including optimal defence theory, growth rate hypothesis and growth differentiation–balance hypothesis, can be used to make testable predictions about when and how plants should defend flowers against florivores. The majority of the predictions remain untested, but they provide a theoretical foundation on which to base future experiments. The approaches to studying florivory that we outline may yield novel insights into floral and defence traits not illuminated by studies of pollination or herbivory alone.
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
BUTTERFLIES AND PLANTS: A STUDY IN COEVOLUTION
Ehrlich, P. R., & Raven, P. H. (1964) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1964.tb01674.x · Cited by 4,495
The Dilemma of Plants: To Grow or Defend
Herms, D. A., & Mattson, W. J. (1992) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/417659 · Cited by 4,262
Resource Availability and Plant Antiherbivore Defense
Coley, P. D., Bryant, J. P., & Chapin, F. S. (1985) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.230.4728.895 · Cited by 3,967
Induced Responses to Herbivory
Karban, R., & Baldwin, I. T. (1997) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226424972.001.0001 · Cited by 2,688
Plant Apparency and Chemical Defense
Feeny, P. (1976) · Biochemical Interaction Between Plants and Insects · doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-2646-5_1 · Cited by 2,344
Handbook of experimental pollination biology
Jones, C. E., & Little, R. J. (1983) · Cited by 1,991
Feeny, P. (1970) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1934037 · Cited by 1,902
Scared to death? The effects of intimidation and consumption in predator-prey interactions
Preisser, E. L., Bolnick, D. I., & Benard, M. F. (2005) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/04-0719 · Cited by 1,840
Flower and Fruit Abortion: Proximate Causes and Ultimate Functions
Stephenson, A. G. (1981) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.12.110181.001345 · Cited by 1,822
The Ecology and Evolution of Inducible Defenses
Harvell, C. D. (1990) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/416841 · Cited by 1,715
Cited by
Transmission of Bacterial Endophytes
Frank, A., Saldierna Guzmán, J., & Shay, J. (2017) · Microorganisms · doi:10.3390/microorganisms5040070 · Cited by 478
Knauer, A. C., & Schiestl, F. P. (2017) · Evolutionary Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10682-016-9878-8 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- McCall, A. C., & Irwin, R. E.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-10-18
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1351-1365
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W2169684882
- Cited by
- 478
- References
- 67
- FWCI
- 14.08
- 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: Florivory: the intersection of pollination and herbivory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00975.x
- The paper
- McCall, A. C., & Irwin, R. E. (2006). Florivory: the intersection of pollination and herbivory. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00975.x
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.