Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
222
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
222 results for “Nectar”
Figs. 24-29 in Nectar production in the pollen flower of Anemone nemorosa in comparison with other Ranunculaceae and Magnolia (Magnoliaceae)
Figs. 24-29 Androecial nectaries in the Ranunculaceae. Fig. 24 Ranunculus acris, scales covering the nectary at the base of each petaloid staminode. Fig. 25 Pulsatilla turczaninovii, just-opening flower in the early female phase of anthesis presenting abundant nectar at the base of the androecium. Fig. 26 Clematis alpina, one tepal dissected (scar marked with asterisk). Figs. 27–29 Carpellary nectaries. Figs. 27–28
Data from: Three's a crowd: trade-offs between attracting pollinators and ant bodyguards with nectar rewards in Turnera
Many plants attract insect pollinators with floral nectar (FN) and ant "bodyguards" with extrafloral nectar (EFN). If nectar production is costly or physiologically linked across glands, investment in one mutualism may trade off with investment in the other. We confirmed that changes in FN and EFN availability alter pollination and ant defense mutualisms in a field population of Turnera ulmifolia. Plants with additional FN tended to produce more seeds, while plants with reduced EFN production experienced less florivory. We then mimicked the consumptive effects of mutualists by removing FN or EFN daily for 50 days in a full factorial design using three Turnera species (T. joelii, T. subulata, and T. ulmifolia) in a glasshouse experiment. For T. ulmifolia and T. subulata, but not T. joelii, removing either nectar reduced production of the other, showing for the first time that EFN and FN production can trade off. In T. subulata, increased investment in FN decreased seed set, suggesting that nectar production can have direct fitness costs. Through the linked expression of EFN and FN, floral visitors may negatively affect biotic defense, and extrafloral nectary visitors may negatively affect pollination.
Data from: Nectar bacteria, but not yeast, weaken a plant-pollinator mutualism
Mutualistic interactions are often subject to exploitation by species that are not directly involved in the mutualism. Understanding which organisms act as such 'third-party' species and how they do so is a major challenge in the current study of mutualistic interactions. Here, we show that even species that appear ecologically similar can have contrasting effects as third-party species. We experimentally compared the effects of nectar-inhabiting bacteria and yeasts on the strength of a mutualism between a hummingbird-pollinated shrub, Mimulus aurantiacus, and its pollinators. We found that the common bacterium Gluconobacter sp., but not the common yeast Metschnikowia reukaufii, reduced pollination success, seed set and nectar consumption by pollinators, thereby weakening the plant–pollinator mutualism. We also found that the bacteria reduced nectar pH and total sugar concentration more greatly than the yeasts did and that the bacteria decreased glucose concentration and increased fructose concentration whereas the yeasts affected neither. These distinct changes to nectar chemistry may underlie the microbes' contrasting effects on the mutualism. Our results suggest that it is necessary to understand the determinants of microbial species composition in nectar and their differential modification of floral rewards to explain the mutual benefits that plants and pollinators gain from each other.
Figure 1 in Diversity and nectar hosts of flower-settling moths within a Florida sandhill ecosystem
Figure 1. Photographic documentation of settling behaviour: (A) Synchlora frondaria (Geometridae) on Balduina angustifolia (Asteraceae); (B) Idaea ostentaria (Geometridae) on Eriogonum tomentosum (Polygonaceae); (C) Hormoschista latipalpus (Noctuidae) on E. tomentosum; (D) Herpetogramma bipunctalis (Crambidae) on Liatris tenuifolia (Asteracaea); (E) Samea ecclesialis (Crambidae) on Ageratina aromatica (Asteraceae); (F) Schinia sanguinea (Noctuidae) on L. tenuifolia.
Figure 2 in Diversity and nectar hosts of flower-settling moths within a Florida sandhill ecosystem
Figure 2. Species of moths observed taking nectar on Ageratina aromatica, including number of individual moths sampled with and without pollen. Two individuals observed but not sampled and not included in graph were Scopula loutaria (Geometridae) and Leucania scirpicola (Noctuidae).
FIGURE 1 in The longhorn beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) of Kentucky with notes on larval hosts, adult nectar use, and semiochemical attraction
FIGURE 1. Distribution of specimen records and Level III ecoregions within Kentucky (A), and heatmap of specimen density and the counties of Kentucky (B).
Butterfly nectar foraging and flowering plant community data from field surveys in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
<p>The negative impacts of non-native species have been well documented, but some non-natives can play a positive role in native ecosystems. One way that non-native plants can positively interact with native butterflies is by provisioning nectar. Relatively little is known about the role of phenology in determining native butterfly visitation to non-native plants for nectar, yet flowering time directly controls nectar availability. Here, we investigate the phenological patterns of flowering by native and non-native plants and nectar foraging by native butterflies in an oak savanna on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. We also test whether native butterflies select nectar sources in proportion to their availability. We found that non-native plants were well integrated into butterfly nectar diets (83% of foraging observations) and that visitation to non-natives increased later in the season when native plants were no longer flowering. We also found that butterflies selected non-native flowers more often than expected based on their availability, suggesting that these plants represent a potentially valuable resource. Our study shows that non-native species have the potential to drive key species interactions in seasonal ecosystems. Management regimes focused on eradicating non-native species may need to re-consider their aims and evaluate resources that non-natives provide.</p>
NECTAR Study: Nectar (Honey) Effects on Comfort, Thoughts, and Regularity
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04187950. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Data from: Do artificial nectar feeders affect bat–plant interactions in an Ecuadorian cloud forest?
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Butterfly nectar foraging and flowering plant community data from field surveys in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Nectar bacteria, but not yeast, weaken a plant-pollinator mutualism
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Phenology of farmland floral resources reveals seasonal gaps in nectar availability for bumblebees
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Nectar robbing effects over a key nectar source plant (Tecoma fulva, Bignoniaceae) in a dry tropical Andean valley
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Pre-infection effects of nectar secondary compounds on a bumble bee gut pathogen
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Community-wide consequences of sexual dimorphism: evidence from nectar microbes in dioecious plants
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Insectivorous bat pollinates columnar cactus more effectively per visit than specialized nectar bat
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Nectar robbing: a common phenomenon mainly determined by accessibility constraints, nectar volume and density of energy rewards
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Foraging strategies of generalist and specialist Old World nectar bats in response to temporally variable floral resources
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Plant toxin levels in nectar vary spatially across native and introduced populations
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Why are flowers sweeter than fruits or buds? Variation in extrafloral nectar secretion throughout the floral ontogeny of a myrmecophile
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.