4.8 Article

A shift from phenol to silica-based leaf defences during long-term soil and ecosystem development

Journal

ECOLOGY LETTERS
Volume 24, Issue 5, Pages 984-995

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.13713

Keywords

phenylalanine; plant defence strategies; plant phenols; plant silicon; plant– herbivore interactions; resource availability hypothesis; resource limitation; silica‐ based defence; soil fertility gradient; trade‐ offs

Categories

Funding

  1. 'Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique' of Belgium (FNRS) [SiCliNG CDR J.0117.18]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that plants growing on nitrogen (N) limited young soils tend to express phenol-based defences, while plants on old, phosphorus (P) impoverished soils favor silica-based defences. The two types of defences show a negative correlation at both the community and individual species level.
The resource availability hypothesis predicts that plants adapted to infertile soils have high levels of anti-herbivore leaf defences. This hypothesis has been mostly explored for secondary metabolites such as phenolics, whereas it remains underexplored for silica-based defences. We determined leaf concentrations of total phenols and silicon (Si) in plants growing along the 2-million-year Jurien Bay chronosequence, exhibiting an extreme gradient of soil fertility. We found that nitrogen (N) limitation on young soils led to a greater expression of phenol-based defences, whereas old, phosphorus (P)-impoverished soils favoured silica-based defences. Both defence types were negatively correlated at the community and individual species level. Our results suggest a trade-off among these two leaf defence strategies based on the strength and type of nutrient limitation, thereby opening up new perspectives for the resource availability hypothesis and plant defence research. This study also highlights the importance of silica-based defences under low P supply.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available