Um pica-pau que aprecia bebidas doces: o joão-velho procura néctar e poliniza plantas de dossel no sudeste do Brasil

Insects are the staple diet of woodpeckers, but some species also habitually feed on fruits. A few woodpecker species are recorded as flower visitors for nectar intake. We report here on the blond-crested woodpecker (Celeus flavescens) taking nectar from flowers of two canopy species, Spirotheca passifloroides (Bombacaceae) and Schwartzia brasiliensis (Marcgraviaceae), in the Atlantic forest of south-eastern Brazil. Spirotheca passifloroides blooms for three months in the austral winter, whereas S. brasiliensis blooms for two months in the summer. Flowers of both species produce large amounts of dilute nectar. Celeus flavescens visits several flowers per plant touching the anthers and stigmas with its head and throat, and thus acts as a pollen vector. We suggest that woodpeckers may be more frequent flower visitors than previously thought, and that feeding on ripe fruits may be a simple behavioural step for the origin of nectar feeding by Neotropical woodpeckers.Insetos formam a dieta básica dos pica-paus, porém algumas espécies também se alimentam habitualmente de frutos e poucas espécies procuram flores para tomar néctar. Registramos aqui o joão-velho ou pica-pau-de-cabeça-amarela (Celeus flavescens) ao tomar néctar de flores em duas espécies de plantas do dossel, Spirotheca passifloroides (Bombacaceae) e Schwartzia brasiliensis (Marcgraviaceae), em Mata Atlântica do sudeste do Brasil. Spirotheca passifloroides floresce por três meses no inverno, ao passo que S. brasiliensis floresce ao longo de dois meses no verão. As flores de ambas as espécies produzem néctar abundante e diluído. Celeus flavescens visita várias flores por planta, tocando as anteras e os estigmas com a cabeça e o pescoço, assim agindo como polinizador. Sugerimos que visitas de pica-paus a flores sejam mais freqüentes do que o suposto e que se alimentar em frutos maduros seria um passo comportamental simples para a origem da tomada de néctar por pica-paus neotropicais.00Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES

Data standardization of plant–pollinator interactions

Background: Animal pollination is an important ecosystem function and service, ensuring both the integrity of natural systems and human well-being. Although many knowledge shortfalls remain, some high-quality data sets on biological interactions are now available. The development and adoption of standards for biodiversity data and metadata has promoted great advances in biological data sharing and aggregation, supporting large-scale studies and science-based public policies. However, these standards are currently not suitable to fully support interaction data sharing. Results: Here we present a vocabulary of terms and a data model for sharing plant–pollinator interactions data based on the Darwin Core standard. The vocabulary introduces 48 new terms targeting several aspects of plant–pollinator interactions and can be used to capture information from different approaches and scales. Additionally, we provide solutions for data serialization using RDF, XML, and DwC-Archives and recommendations of existing controlled vocabularies for some of the terms. Our contribution supports open access to standardized data on plant–pollinator interactions. Conclusions: The adoption of the vocabulary would facilitate data sharing to support studies ranging from the spatial and temporal distribution of interactions to the taxonomic, phenological, functional, and phylogenetic aspects of plant–pollinator interactions. We expect to fill data and knowledge gaps, thus further enabling scientific research on the ecology and evolution of plant–pollinator communities, biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services, and the development of public policies. The proposed data model is flexible and can be adapted for sharing other types of interactions data by developing discipline-specific vocabularies of termsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in hummingbird-plant pollination networks

Abundant pollinators are often more generalised than rare pollinators. This could be because abundant species have more chance encounters with potential interaction partners. On the other hand, generalised species could have a competitive advantage over specialists, leading to higher abundance. Determining the direction of the abundance-generalisation relationship is therefore a ‘chicken-and-egg’ dilemma. Here we determine the direction of the relationship between abundance and generalisation in plant-hummingbird pollination networks across the Americas. We find evidence that hummingbird pollinators are generalised because they are abundant, and little evidence that hummingbirds are abundant because they are generalised. Additionally, most patterns of species-level abundance and generalisation were well explained by a null model that assumed interaction neutrality (interaction probabilities defined by species relative abundances). These results suggest that neutral processes play a key role in driving broad patterns of generalisation in animal pollinators across large spatial scales

Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in hummingbird-plant pollination networks

Abundant pollinators are often more generalised than rare pollinators. This could be because abundant species have more chance encounters with potential interaction partners. On the other hand, generalised species could have a competitive advantage over specialists, leading to higher abundance. Determining the direction of the abundance-generalisation relationship is therefore a ‘chicken-and-egg’ dilemma. Here we determine the direction of the relationship between abundance and generalisation in plant-hummingbird pollination networks across the Americas. We find evidence that hummingbird pollinators are generalised because they are abundant, and little evidence that hummingbirds are abundant because they are generalised. Additionally, most patterns of species-level abundance and generalisation were well explained by a null model that assumed interaction neutrality (interaction probabilities defined by species relative abundances). These results suggest that neutral processes play a key role in driving broad patterns of generalisation in animal pollinators across large spatial scales

Data from: Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in plant-hummingbird pollination networks

Abundant pollinators are often more generalised than rare pollinators. This could be because abundant species have more chance encounters with potential interaction partners. On the other hand, generalised species could have a competitive advantage over specialists, leading to higher abundance. Determining the direction of the abundance-generalisation relationship is therefore a ‘chicken-and-egg’ dilemma. Here we determine the direction of the relationship between abundance and generalisation in plant-hummingbird pollination networks across the Americas. We find evidence that hummingbird pollinators are generalised because they are abundant, and little evidence that hummingbirds are abundant because they are generalised. Additionally, most patterns of species-level abundance and generalisation were well explained by a null model that assumed interaction neutrality (interaction probabilities defined by species relative abundances). These results suggest that neutral processes play a key role in driving broad patterns of generalisation in animal pollinators across large spatial scales

Data from: Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in plant-hummingbird pollination networks

Abundant pollinators are often more generalised than rare pollinators. This could be because abundant species have more chance encounters with potential interaction partners. On the other hand, generalised species could have a competitive advantage over specialists, leading to higher abundance. Determining the direction of the abundance-generalisation relationship is therefore a ‘chicken-and-egg’ dilemma. Here we determine the direction of the relationship between abundance and generalisation in plant-hummingbird pollination networks across the Americas. We find evidence that hummingbird pollinators are generalised because they are abundant, and little evidence that hummingbirds are abundant because they are generalised. Additionally, most patterns of species-level abundance and generalisation were well explained by a null model that assumed interaction neutrality (interaction probabilities defined by species relative abundances). These results suggest that neutral processes play a key role in driving broad patterns of generalisation in animal pollinators across large spatial scales

Plant-hummingbird interaction networks

19 plant-hummingbird interaction networks. If used, please ensure taxonomy is up-to-date and cite Simmons, B. I., Vizentin‐Bugoni, J. , Maruyama, P. K., Cotton, P. A., Marín‐Gómez, O. H., Lara, C. , Rosero‐Lasprilla, L. , Maglianesi, M. A., Ortiz‐Pulido, R. , Rocca, M. A., Rodrigues, L. C., Tinoco, B. , Vasconcelos, M. F., Sazima, M. , González, A. M., Sonne, J. , Rahbek, C. , Dicks, L. V., Dalsgaard, B. and Sutherland, W. J. (2019), Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in plant–hummingbird pollination networks. Oikos. doi:10.1111/oik.0610

Species abundances from each of the 19 plant-hummingbird pollination networks

If used, please ensure taxonomy is up-to-date and cite Simmons, B. I., Vizentin‐Bugoni, J. , Maruyama, P. K., Cotton, P. A., Marín‐Gómez, O. H., Lara, C. , Rosero‐Lasprilla, L. , Maglianesi, M. A., Ortiz‐Pulido, R. , Rocca, M. A., Rodrigues, L. C., Tinoco, B. , Vasconcelos, M. F., Sazima, M. , González, A. M., Sonne, J. , Rahbek, C. , Dicks, L. V., Dalsgaard, B. and Sutherland, W. J. (2019), Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in plant–hummingbird pollination networks. Oikos. doi:10.1111/oik.0610

Plant-hummingbird interaction networks

19 plant-hummingbird interaction networks. If used, please ensure taxonomy is up-to-date and cite Simmons, B. I., Vizentin‐Bugoni, J. , Maruyama, P. K., Cotton, P. A., Marín‐Gómez, O. H., Lara, C. , Rosero‐Lasprilla, L. , Maglianesi, M. A., Ortiz‐Pulido, R. , Rocca, M. A., Rodrigues, L. C., Tinoco, B. , Vasconcelos, M. F., Sazima, M. , González, A. M., Sonne, J. , Rahbek, C. , Dicks, L. V., Dalsgaard, B. and Sutherland, W. J. (2019), Abundance drives broad patterns of generalisation in plant–hummingbird pollination networks. Oikos. doi:10.1111/oik.0610