A global overview of pigeon–fruit interactions

Pigeons are widespread worldwide. These relatively large‐bodied birds can significantly influence ecosystem structure and function through their feeding habits, especially on islands where large mammals and a few avian taxa are scarce or absent. However, their dietary guilds as frugivores and granivores, and their ecological roles as seed dispersers and predators are poorly understood. This study presents a comprehensive bibliographic review of the relationships between pigeons and the fruits and seeds they consume globally, analysing 369 scientific publications to explore global research trends and identify knowledge gaps. We categorized pigeon diet data based on the consumption of fleshy fruits or seeds and dry fruits, along with functional data represented by seed dispersal and predation. This approach allowed us to explore how different ecological contexts, specifically islands and continents, may influence pigeon feeding patterns. Although our review covered dietary and seed dispersal and predation functional data for 23 and 35 genera on islands and 23 and 28 genera on continents, data at the species level remain insufficient, even in bioregions with high pigeon species‐richness. Poaceae (114 species), Moraceae (114 species, which includes 94 fig Ficus species) and Fabaceae (98 species) were the most represented families in the recorded diet of pigeons. We predicted that the proportion of fleshy fruit in the pigeon diet would be significantly higher on islands than on continents, with observed values of 0.66 and 0.58, respectively. Although some pigeon genera are obligate frugivores, others have a mixed frugivorous and granivorous diet. The comparison between seed dispersal and seed predation indicated that seed predation was underestimated in diet studies. However, functional data on seed dispersal and predation showed that several genera could be both seed dispersers and predators, suggesting that the interactions between pigeons and fruits may be more complex than the commonly understood dichotomous dietary categorization. We also identified under‐researched dietary data and publication biases across bioregions and topics, suggesting further investigation to fill the gaps.