4.3 Article

Effects of Plant Vascular Architecture on Aboveground-Belowground-Induced Responses to Foliar and Root Herbivores on Nicotiana tabacum

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ECOLOGY
卷 34, 期 10, 页码 1349-1359

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10886-008-9541-0

关键词

Aboveground-belowground interactions; Induced plant responses; Orthostichy; Plant sectoriality; Root herbivory; Vascular architecture

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DBI-0500550]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Herbivores induce systemic changes in plant traits, and the strength of these induced responses is often associated with the degree of vascular connectivity that links damaged and undamaged plant tissues. Although this phenomenon is known to occur aboveground in leaves, it is unknown whether or not leaf-root induction similarly follows the vascular architecture of plants. To test for this possibility, we manipulated foliar and root herbivory on tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) by the leaf-chewing insect Spodoptera exigua and the root-galling nematode Meloidogyne incognita. Subsequent changes in secondary chemistry (alkaloids and phenolics) were measured in leaves and roots that were orthostichous (vertically aligned) and nonorthostichous (opposite) from the herbivore-damaged tissues. Aboveground caterpillar herbivory elicited stronger secondary chemical responses in orthostichous compared with nonorthostichous plant tissues, although the magnitude of this difference was greater in leaves than roots. However, belowground nematode herbivory did not affect the secondary chemistry of tobacco leaves, despite inducing strong local responses in roots. Thus, plant vascular architecture can mediate the magnitude of systemic induction in roots as well as in leaves, with stronger responses in tissues that are more closely aligned. As a result, herbivores that co-occur on the same sector of plant (both aboveground and belowground) may be more likely to affect one another via induced responses than herbivores that occur on plant tissues sharing fewer resources.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据