Abstract
The Mexican native bumblebee Bombus ephippiatus Say was evaluated as a potential pollinator of greenhouse tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicon L.). The experiments were performed at San Andrés Cholula, Puebla, Mexico, from June to December 2004 in two 1 000 m2 greenhouses planted with tomatoes of the cultivar Mallory (Hazera ®). For the experiments, we used two colonies of Bombus ephippiatus, reared in the laboratory from queens captured in the field. Four treatments were applied to 20 study plants: pollination by bumble bees, manual pollination, pollination by mechanical vibration and no pollination (bagged flowers, no vibration). We measured percentage of flowers visited by bumble bees, number of seeds per fruit, maturing time, sugar content, fruit weight and fruit shape. All available flowers were visited by bumblebees, as measured by the degree of anther cone bruising. The number of seeds per fruit was higher for bumble bee-pollinated plants as compared with plants pollinated mechanically or not pollinated and was not significantly different between hand-pollinated and bumble bee-pollinated plants. Maturation time was significantly longer and sugar content, fresh weight and seed count were significantly higher for bumblebee pollinated flowers than for flowers pollinated manually or with no supplemental pollination, but did not differ with flowers pollinated mechanically.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Bumblebees visited all available flowers.
- Taxon
- tomatoes
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Outcome
- All available flowers were visited by bumblebeese0
BombusOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All available flowers were visited by bumblebees”
t0“Greenhouse Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Bumblebee pollination yielded more seeds per fruit than mechanical or no pollination.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- bumble bee-pollinatede0
- Interactor
- bumble beee0pollinator
- Outcome
- number of seeds per fruite0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- plants pollinated mechanically or not pollinatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of seeds per fruit was higher for bumble bee-pollinated plants as compared with plants pollinated mechanically or not pollinated”
t0“Greenhouse Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Seed number did not differ significantly between hand and bumblebee pollination.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- bumble bee-pollinatede0
- Interactor
- bumble beee0pollinator
- Outcome
- number of seeds per fruite0
- Direction
- not significantly differente0
- Comparator
- hand-pollinatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of seeds per fruit was higher for bumble bee-pollinated plants as compared with plants pollinated mechanically or not pollinated and was not significantly different between hand-pollinated and bumble bee-pollinated plants”
t0“Greenhouse Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Bumblebee pollination lengthened maturation time relative to manual or no supplemental pollination.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- bumblebee pollinatede0
- Interactor
- bumblebeee0pollinator
- Outcome
- Maturation timee0
- Direction
- longere0
- Comparator
- flowers pollinated manually or with no supplemental pollinatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maturation time was significantly longer and sugar content, fresh weight and seed count were significantly higher for bumblebee pollinated flowers than for flowers pollinated manually or with no supplemental pollination”
t0“Greenhouse Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Bumblebee pollination increased sugar content, fresh weight and seed count relative to manual or no supplemental pollination.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- bumblebee pollinatede0
- Interactor
- bumblebeee0pollinator
- Outcome
- sugar content, fresh weight and seed counte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- flowers pollinated manually or with no supplemental pollinatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sugar content, fresh weight and seed count were significantly higher for bumblebee pollinated flowers than for flowers pollinated manually or with no supplemental pollination”
t0“Greenhouse Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
The latter maturation and fruit measures did not differ from mechanical pollination.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- bumblebee pollinatede0
- Interactor
- bumblebeee0pollinator
- Outcome
- sugar content, fresh weight and seed counte0
- Direction
- did not differe0
- Comparator
- flowers pollinated mechanicallye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maturation time was significantly longer and sugar content, fresh weight and seed count were significantly higher for bumblebee pollinated flowers than for flowers pollinated manually or with no supplemental pollination, but did not differ with flowers pollinated mechanically”
t0“Greenhouse Tomatoes”
The same questions in other papers
pollination · quality: sugar starch · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →pollination · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.