1.Although carnivores indirectly improve plant fitness by decreasing herbivory, they may also decrease plant reproduction by disrupting plant-pollinator mutualism. The overall magnitude of the resulting net effect of carnivores on plant fitness and the factors responsible for the variations in strength and direction of this effect have not been explored quantitatively to date. 2.We performed a meta-analysis of 67 studies containing 163 estimates of the effects of carnivores on plant fitness and examined the relative importance of several potential sources of variation in carnivore effects. 3.Carnivores significantly increased plant fitness via suppression of herbivores and decreased fitness by consuming pollinators. The overall net effect of carnivores on plant fitness was positive (32% increase), indicating that effects via herbivores were stronger than effects via pollinators. 4.Parasitoids had stronger positive effect on plant fitness than predators. Active hunters increased plant fitness, whereas stationary predators had no significant effect, presumably because they were more prone to disrupt plant-pollinator mutualism. Carnivores with broader habitat domain had negative effects on plant fitness, whereas those with narrow habitat domain had positive effects. 5.Predator effects were positive for plants which offered rewards (e.g. extrafloral nectaries) and negative for plants which lacked any attractors. 6.This study adds new knowledge on the factors that determine the strength of terrestrial trophic cascades and highlights the importance of considering simultaneous contrasting interactions in the same study system. © 2011 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2011 British Ecological Society.803696704Altshuler, D.L., Novel interactions of non-pollinating ants with pollinators and fruit consumers in a tropical forest (1999) Oecologia, 119, pp. 600-606Bell, T., Neill, W.E., Schluter, D., The effect of temporal scale on the outcome of trophic cascade experiments (2003) Oecologia, 134, pp. 578-586Borer, E.T., Seabloom, E.W., Shurin, J.B., Anderson, K.E., Blanchette, C.A., Broitman, B., Cooper, S.D., Halpern, B.S., What determines the strength of a trophic cascade? (2005) Ecology, 86, pp. 528-537Brechbühl, R., Kropf, C., Bacher, S., Impact of flower-dwelling crab spiders on plant-pollinator mutualisms (2010) Basic and Applied Ecology, 11, pp. 76-82Coley, P.D., Barone, J.A., Herbivory and plant defenses in tropical forests (1996) Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 27, pp. 305-335Cooper, H., (1998) Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature Review, p. 201. , 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CADukas, R., Bumble bee predators reduce pollinator density and plant fitness (2005) Ecology, 86, pp. 1401-1406Dukas, R., Morse, D.H., Crab spiders show mixed effects on flower-visiting bees and no effect on plant fitness components (2005) Ecoscience, 12, pp. 244-247Dyer, L.A., Coley, P.D., Tritrophic interactions in tropical versus temperate Communities (2002) Multitrophic Level Interactions, pp. 67-88. , (eds T. Tscharntke & B.A. Hawkins) - Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 283ppGonçalves-Souza, T., Omena, P.M., Souza, J.C., Romero, G.Q., Trait-mediated effects on flowers: artificial spiders deceive pollinators and decrease plant fitness (2008) Ecology, 89, pp. 2407-2413Gurevitch, J., Hedges, L.V., Statistical issues in ecological meta-analyses (1999) Ecology, 80, pp. 1142-1149Gurevitch, J., Hedges, L.V., Meta-analysis: combining the results of independent experiments (2001) Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments, pp. 347-369. , eds S.M. Scheiner & J. Gurevitch) - Oxford University Press, New YorkHairston, N.G., Smith, F.E., Slobodkin, L.B., Community structure, population control, and competition (1960) American Naturalist, 44, pp. 421-425Halaj, J., Wise, D.H., Terrestrial trophic cascades: how much do they trickle? (2001) American Naturalist, 157, pp. 262-281Hedges, L.V., Gurevitch, J., Curtis, P.S., The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology (1999) Ecology, 80, pp. 1150-1156Hedges, L.V., Olkin, I., (1985) Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis, , Academic Press, Boston, MAHeil, M., Indirect defence via tritrophic interactions (2008) New Phytologist, 178, pp. 41-61Hoeksema, J.D., Chaudhary, V.B., Gehring, C.A., Johnson, N.C., Karst, J., Koide, R.T., Pringle, A., Umbanhowar, J., A meta-analysis of context-dependency in plant response to inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi (2010) Ecology Letters, 13, pp. 394-407Ings, T.C., Chittka, L., Predator crypsis enhances behaviourally-mediated indirect effects on plants by altering bumblebee foraging preferences (2009) Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 276, pp. 2031-2036Knight, T.M., McCoy, M.W., Chase, J.M., McCoy, K.A., Holt, R.D., Trophic cascades across ecosystems (2005) Nature, 437, pp. 880-883Knight, T.M., Chase, J.M., Hillebrand, H., Holt, R.D., Predation on mutualists can reduce the strength of trophic cascades (2006) Ecology Letters, 9, pp. 1173-1178Koricheva, J., Meta-analysis of sources of variation in fitness costs of plant antiherbivore defenses (2002) Ecology, 83, pp. 176-190Larson, B.M.H., Barrett, S.C.H., A comparative analysis of pollen limitation in flowering plants (2000) Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 69, pp. 503-520Lima, S.L., Energy, predators and the behavior of feeding hummingbirds (1991) Evolutionary Ecology, 5, pp. 220-230Louda, S.M., Influorescence spider: a cost/benefit analysis for the host plant, Haplopappus venetus Blake (Asteraceae) (1982) Oecologia, 55, pp. 185-191Morse, D.H., (2007) Predator Upon a Flower: Life History and Fitness in a Crab Spider, , Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MANorment, C.J., The effect of nectar-thieving ants on the reproductive success of Frasera speciosa (Gentianaceae) (1988) American Midland Naturalist, 120, pp. 331-336Polis, G.A., Why are parts of the world green? Multiple factors control productivity and the distribution of biomass (1999) Oikos, 86, pp. 3-15Preisser, E.L., Orrock, J.L., Schmitz, O.J., Predator hunting mode and habitat domain alter nonconsumptive effects in predator-prey interactions (2007) Ecology, 88, pp. 2744-2751Primack, R.B., Longevity of individual flowers (1985) Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 16, pp. 15-37Rico-Gray, V., Oliveira, P.S., (2007) The Ecology and Evolution of Ant-Plant Interactions, p. 346. , The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILRomero, G.Q., Benson, W.W., Biotic interactions of mites, plants and leaf domatia (2005) Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 8, pp. 436-440Romero, G.Q., Souza, J.C., Vasconcellos-Neto, J., Antiherbivore protection by mutualistic spiders and the role of plant glandular trichomes (2008) Ecology, 89, pp. 3105-3115Romero, G.Q., Vasconcellos-Netor, J., Beneficial effects of flower-dwelling predators on their host plant (2004) Ecology, 85, pp. 446-457Rosenberg, M.S., Adams, D.C., Gurevitch, J., (2000) MetaWin: Statistical Software for Meta-Analysis, , Version 2.0. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MARosumek, F.B., Silveira, F.A.O., Neves, F.S., Barbosa, N.P.U., Diniz, L., Oki, Y., Pezzini, F., Cornelissen, T., Ants on plants: a meta-analysis of the role of ants as plant biotic defenses (2009) Oecologia, 160, pp. 537-549Rutter, M.T., Rausher, M.D., Natural selection on extrafloral nectar production in Chamaecrista fasciculata: the costs and benefits of a mutualism trait (2004) Evolution, 58, pp. 2657-2668Schemske, D.W., Mittelbach, G.G., Cornell, H.V., Sobel, J.M., Roy, K., Is there a latitudinal gradient in the importance of biotic interactions? (2009) Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 40, pp. 245-269Schmitz, O.J., Predator diversity and trophic interactions (2007) Ecology, 88, pp. 2415-2426Schmitz, O.J., Ecosystem function effects of predator hunting mode on grassland (2008) Science, 319, pp. 952-954Schmitz, O.J., Hambäck, P.A., Beckerman, A.P., Trophic cascades in terrestrial systems: a review of the effects of carnivore removal on plants (2000) American Naturalist, 155, pp. 141-153Schmitz, O.J., Suttle, K.B., Effects of top predator species on the nature of indirect effects in an old field food web (2001) Ecology, 82, pp. 2072-2081Sendoya, S., Freitas, A.V.L., Oliveira, P.S., Egg-laying butterflies distinguish predaceous ants by sight (2009) American Naturalist, 174, pp. 134-140Shurin, J.B., Gruner, D.S., Hillebrand, H., All wet or dried up? Real differences between aquatic and terrestrial food webs (2006) Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273, pp. 1-9Shurin, J.B., Borer, E.T., Seabloom, E.W., Anderson, K., Blanchette, C.A., Broitman, B., Cooper, S.D., Halpern, B.S., A cross-ecosystem comparison of the strength of trophic cascades (2002) Ecology Letters, 5, pp. 785-791Strong, D.R., Are trophic cascades all wet? Differentiation and donor-control in speciose ecosystems (1992) Ecology, 73, pp. 747-754Styrsky, J.D., Eubanks, M.D., Ecological consequences of interactions between ants and honeydew-producing insects (2007) Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 274, pp. 151-164Suttle, K.B., Pollinators as mediators of top-down effects on plants (2003) Ecology Letters, 6, pp. 688-694Whitney, K.D., Experimental evidence that both parties benefit in a facultative plant-spider mutualism (2004) Ecology, 85, pp. 1642-1650Willmer, P.G., Nuttman, C.V., Raine, N.E., Stone, G.N., Pattrick, J.G., Henson, K., Stillman, P., Knudsen, J.T., Floral volatiles controlling ant behaviour (2009) Functional Ecology, 23, pp. 888-900Zar, J.H., (1996) Biostatistical Analysis, p. 662. , Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ