Tradeoffs associated with constitutive and induced plant resistance against herbivory

Anne Kempel1, Martin Schädler2, Thomas Chrobock1, Markus Fischer1, Mark van Kleunen1
1Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern, 3013 Bern, Switzerland; and
2Department for Community Ecology, Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research, 06110 Halle, Germany

Tóm tắt

Several prominent hypotheses have been posed to explain the immense variability among plant species in defense against herbivores. A major concept in the evolutionary ecology of plant defenses is that tradeoffs of defense strategies are likely to generate and maintain species diversity. In particular, tradeoffs between constitutive and induced resistance and tradeoffs relating these strategies to growth and competitive ability have been predicted. We performed three independent experiments on 58 plant species from 15 different plant families to address these hypotheses in a phylogenetic framework. Because evolutionary tradeoffs may be altered by human-imposed artificial selection, we used 18 wild plant species and 40 cultivated garden-plant species. Across all 58 plant species, we demonstrate a tradeoff between constitutive and induced resistance, which was robust to accounting for phylogenetic history of the species. Moreover, the tradeoff was driven by wild species and was not evident for cultivated species. In addition, we demonstrate that more competitive species—but not fast growing ones—had lower constitutive but higher induced resistance. Thus, our multispecies experiments indicate that the competition–defense tradeoff holds for constitutive resistance and is complemented by a positive relationship of competitive ability with induced resistance. We conclude that the studied genetically determined tradeoffs are indeed likely to play an important role in shaping the high diversity observed among plant species in resistance against herbivores and in life history traits.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.7208/chicago/9780226424972.001.0001

10.1890/08-1895.1

10.1111/j.1558-5646.1994.tb02195.x

10.1086/285938

10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02483-7

10.2307/3545022

10.1086/382601

AA Agrawal, JK Conner, S Rasmann Evolution After Darwin: The First 150 Years, eds MA Bell, WF Eanes, DJ Futuyma, JS Levinton (Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA), pp. 242–268 (2010).

10.1086/417659

WJ Mattson, RK Lawrence, RA Haak, DA Herms, P Charles Mechanisms of Woody Plant Defenses Against Insects. Search for Patterns, eds WJ Mattson, J Levieux, C Bernard-Dagan (Springer, New York), pp. 3–38 (1988).

10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01448.x

10.1111/j.0030-1299.2006.14253.x

10.2307/2261425

YJ Chun, M van Kleunen, W Dawson, The role of enemy release, tolerance and resistance in plant invasions: Linking damage to performance. Ecol Lett 13, 937–946 (2010).

10.1111/j.0030-1299.2006.41023.x

10.1126/science.230.4728.895

10.1890/06-1329.1

10.1023/A:1020821823794

10.1007/s004420050861

10.1093/ee/27.2.297

10.1007/PL00008839

10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[0632:EOPIDI]2.0.CO;2

10.1016/j.tree.2006.10.012

10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[132:PDS]2.0.CO;2

10.2307/1942495

10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[150:TGTAHS]2.0.CO;2

10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00482.x

10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60148-8

10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.880305.x

10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02077.x

10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.07.002

10.1086/285868

10.1023/A:1020377627529

10.1007/s00442-002-0909-5

10.1023/A:1016229616845

10.1017/S0007485300005939

10.1023/A:1009832621516

10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01319.x

10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17418.x

10.1111/j.1365-2435.2009.01647.x

10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00192.x

10.1111/j.1570-7458.1992.tb00662.x

10.1111/j.1570-7458.1993.tb01749.x

DJ Gibson Methods in Comparative Plant Population Ecology (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, 2002).

10.1046/j.1365-2745.2003.00805.x

10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00285.x

; R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2010).

10.1111/j.2041-210X.2010.00044.x