Uncovers pollinator interactions in Annonaceae and highlights implications for conservation.
Annonaceae species often rely on pollinators due to their protogynous flowers, making them vulnerable to pollinator decline. This study explores the interactions between Annonaceae and their floral visitors using a meta‐network approach, aiming to inform conservation and management efforts. A review of 66 studies over the last four decades revealed 339 interactions between 54 Annonaceae species and 230 floral visitors. The Annonoideae subfamily was the most represented, with beetles being the most prominent visitors (47.4%), particularly Nitidulidae and Scarabaeidae families. The analysis identified 15 modules with a high degree of modularity ( Q = 0.80, p < 0.01) for pollinators, and 11 modules for thieves with a significant modularity ( Q = 0.68, p < 0.01), with most species being peripheral within the network. The most connected pollinators in the network were the beetles Cyclocephala atricapilla , Cyclocephala undata and Carpophilus maculatus . The study highlighted a bias toward cultivated species, likely due to their economic importance. The grouping of floral visitors into modules supports previous findings, with beetles dominating due to the family's floral traits. Although beetles were most common, bees, flies, bedbugs, thrips and other beetle families also acted as pollinators, whereas some groups, particularly lepidopterans, were considered pests. The study underscores the importance of Annonaceae in maintaining pollinator populations, contributing to pollination resilience. However, significant knowledge gaps exist. These include a lack of studies on (1) pollination of wild Annonaceae species, crucial for maintaining pollinators of cultivated plants; (2) pollination in understudied regions such as Northeastern Brazil, India and Mexico and (3) pollination of species harvested in the Cerrado, Brazilian Atlantic Forest, Amazonian Forest and in Florida.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barros et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: