Paper · 1988 · Journal of Horticultural Science

The role of insect pollination and plant genotype in strawberry fruit set and fertility

D. Bagnara; C. Vincent

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
13
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

SummaryIn 1984 and 1985, eight strawberry (Fragaria × ananasso Duch) cultivars were exposed to the pollinating activity of honey bees and other insects, or protected by isolating cages. The extent of pollination under cages, measured as percentage of poorly pollinated (PP) fruit, was not related to stamen height or to the ratio between stamen and receptacle heights. Open pollination, compared to absence of insects under cages, decreased the percentage of PP fruit and increased the number of fruit set, the latter being more pronounced in those cultivars which had a lower fruit set under cages. There was no correlation, however, between increase in degree of pollination observed in open polli-nated vs. caged plots, and the frequency of insect visits at blooming. Also, a sizeable, cultivar-specific percentage of PP fruit could still be counted on open pollinated plots, in spite of the abundance of both pollinators and pollen from different genotypic sources. It was concluded that, for some genotypes, pistil sterility can be a cause of poor achene fertility. In all cultivars, flower attractiveness towards bees was positively correlated with flower attractiveness towards other insect pollinators, when honey bees were very numerous, however, they appeared to be stronger competitors, diverting other pollinators to other foraging grounds. Insect pollination was estimated to contribute 28% of the yield, averaged over both years.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 9

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Poorly pollinated fruit under cages was unrelated to stamen height or its ratio to receptacle height.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Organ / stage
stamene0
Outcome
percentage of poorly pollinated (PP) fruite0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The extent of pollination under cages, measured as percentage of poorly pollinated (PP) fruit, was not related to stamen height or to the ratio between stamen and receptacle heights.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 186–368 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Open pollination decreased the percentage of poorly pollinated fruit.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Treatment
Open pollinatione0
Outcome
percentage of PP fruite0
Direction
decreasede0
Comparator
absence of insects under cagese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Open pollination, compared to absence of insects under cages, decreased the percentage of PP fruit and increased the number of fruit set”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 369–505 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Open pollination increased fruit set, especially in cultivars with low fruit set under cages.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Treatment
Open pollinatione0
Outcome
number of fruit sete0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
more pronounced in those cultivars which had a lower fruit set under cagese0
Comparator
absence of insects under cagese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Open pollination, compared to absence of insects under cages, decreased the percentage of PP fruit and increased the number of fruit set, the latter being more pronounced in those cultivars which had a lower fruit set under cages.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 369–599 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Improved pollination under open access was not correlated with insect visit frequency.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Outcome
degree of pollinatione0
Comparator
frequency of insect visits at bloominge0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“no correlation, however, between increase in degree of pollination observed in open polli-nated vs. caged plots, and the frequency of insect visits at blooming.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 610–770 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A cultivar-specific fraction of poorly pollinated fruit remained in open plots despite abundant pollinators and pollen.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Outcome
percentage of PP fruite0
Qualifier
open pollinated plotse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a sizeable, cultivar-specific percentage of PP fruit could still be counted on open pollinated plots, in spite of the abundance of both pollinators and pollen from different genotypic sources.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–969 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pistil sterility may cause poor achene fertility in some genotypes.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Organ / stage
pistile0
Outcome
poor achene fertilitye0
Qualifier
for some genotypese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“for some genotypes, pistil sterility can be a cause of poor achene fertility.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 993–1070 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flower attractiveness to bees positively correlated with attractiveness to other insect pollinators.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Interactor
beesAnthophilae0pollinator
Outcome
flower attractiveness towards beese0
Direction
positively correlatede0
Comparator
flower attractiveness towards other insect pollinatorse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In all cultivars, flower attractiveness towards bees was positively correlated with flower attractiveness towards other insect pollinators”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1071–1209 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

When abundant, honey bees appeared to divert other pollinators to other foraging grounds.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Interactor
honey beesApinaee0pollinator
Outcome
diverting other pollinators to other foraging groundse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“when honey bees were very numerous, however, they appeared to be stronger competitors, diverting other pollinators to other foraging grounds.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1211–1352 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Insect pollination contributed an estimated 28% of strawberry yield across both years.

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
Treatment
Insect pollinatione0
Outcome
yielde0
Value
28%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Insect pollination was estimated to contribute 28% of the yield, averaged over both years.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1353–1443 · show in text ↑
t0

“strawberry fruit set and fertility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–87 · show in text ↑

pollination · yield · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 10 positive, 3 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 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.