The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of experimental shifts in flowering phenology on plant-pollinator interactions
Abstract
Climate change has led to phenological shifts in flowering plants and insect pollinators, causing concern that these shifts will disrupt plant-pollinator mutualisms. We experimentally investigated how shifts in flowering onset affect pollinator visitation for 14 native perennial plant species, six of which have exhibited shifts to earlier flowering over the last 70 years and eight of which have not. We manipulated flowering onset in greenhouses and then observed pollinator visitation in the field. Five of six species with historically advanced flowering received more visits when flowering was experimentally advanced, whereas seven of eight species with historically unchanged flowering received fewer visits when flowering earlier. This pattern suggests that species unconstrained by pollinators have advanced their flowering, whereas species constrained by pollinators have not. In contrast to current concern about phenological mismatches disrupting plant-pollinator mutualisms, mismatches at the onset of flowering are not occurring for most of our study species.
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
The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., et al. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/387253a0 · Cited by 22,585
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems
Parmesan, C., & Yohe, G. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01286 · Cited by 11,265
Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants
Root, T. L., Price, J. T., Hall, K. R., Schneider, S. H., Rosenzweig, C., & Pounds, J. A. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01333 · Cited by 4,774
Interaction frequency as a surrogate for the total effect of animal mutualists on plants
Vázquez, D. P., Morris, W. F., & Jordano, P. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00810.x · Cited by 599 · cited 1×
“Nonetheless, the effectiveness of a given pollinator can generally be inferred from visitation frequency, which is often strongly positively correlated with total pollination service (Vázquez et al. 2005; Sahli & Conner 2006, 2007).”
Background
Cited by
Wilsey, B. J., Daneshgar, P. P., & Polley, H. W. (2011) · Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics · doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2011.07.002 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Rafferty, N. E., & Ives, A. R.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-11-16
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-74
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2128801193
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 14.96
- 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: Effects of experimental shifts in flowering phenology on plant-pollinator interactions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01557.x
- The paper
- Rafferty, N. E., & Ives, A. R. (2011). Effects of experimental shifts in flowering phenology on plant-pollinator interactions. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01557.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.
