Tolerance to apical and foliar damage: Costs and mechanisms in Raphanus raphanistrum

Oikos

Volumn 116, Issue 12, 2007, Pages 2071-2081

  Boalt, Elin ^a   Lehtilä, Kari ^a  

^a School of Life Sciences Södertörn University   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOSPERM; FLORAL TRAIT; HERBIVORE; PEST DAMAGE; PLANT-HERBIVORE INTERACTION; SEED PRODUCTION; TOLERANCE;

RAPHANUS RAPHANISTRUM; RAPHANUS SATIVUS;

EID: 36549018693     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2007.0030-1299.16056.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Aarssen, L. W. 1995. Hypotheses for the evolution of apical dominance in plants: implications for the interpretation of overcompensation Oikos 74 : 149 156.
2. Agrawal, A. A. et al. 1999. Costs of induced responses and tolerance to herbivory in male and female fitness components of wild radish Evolution 53 : 1093 1104.
3. Aizen, M. A. Raffaele, E. 1998. Flowering-shoot defoliation affects pollen grain size and postpollination pollen performance in Alstroemeria aurea Ecology 79 : 2133 2142.
4. Bergelson, J. Purrington, C. B. 1996. Surveying patterns in the cost of resistance in plants. Am. Nat. 148 : 536 558.
5. Boege, K. et al. 1997. Ontogenetic switches from plant resistence to tolerance: minimizing costs with age? Ecol. Lett. 10 : 177 187.
6. Coley, P. D. et al. 1985. Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defence Science 230 : 895 899.
7. Fineblum, W. L. Rausher, M. D. 1995. Tradeoff between resistance and tolerance to herbivore damage in morning glory Nature 377 : 517 520.
8. Fornoni, J. Núñez-Farfán, J. 2000. Evolutionary costs of Datura stramonium: genetic variations and costs for tolerance to defoliation Evolution 54 : 789 797.
9. Fornoni, J. et al. 2004. Population variation in the cost and benefit of tolerance and resistance against herbivory in Datura stramonium Evolution 58 : 1696 1704.
10. Gillespie, J. Turelli, M. 1989. Genotype-environment interactions and the maintenance of genetic variability Genetics 121 : 129 138.
11. Hedrick, P. 1999. Antagonistic pleiotropy and genetic polymorphism: a perspective Heredity 82 : 126 133.
12. Hochwender, C. et al. 2000. The potential for and constraints on the evolution of compensatory ability in Asclepias syriaca Oecologia 122 : 361 370.
13. Houle, G. Simard, G. 1996. Additive effects of genotype, nutrient availability and type of tissue damage on the compensatory response of Salix planifolia ssp. planifolia to simulated herbivory Oecologia 107 : 373 378.
14. Huhta, A. et al. 2000. Cost of apical dominance in two monocarpic herbs, Erysimum strictum and Rhinanthus minor. Can. J. Bot. 78 : 591 599.
15. Huhta, A.-P. et al. 2003. Grazing tolerance of Gentianella amarella and other monocarpic herbs: why is tolerance highest at low damage levels? Plant Ecol. 166 : 49 61.
16. Juenger, T. Bergelson, J. 2000. The evolution of compensation to herbivory in scarlet gilia, Ipomopsis aggregata: herbivore-imposed natural selection and the quantitative genetics of tolerance Evolution 54 : 764 777.
17. Koricheva, J. 2002. Meta-analysis of sources of variation in fitness costs of plant antiherbivore defenses Ecology 83 : 176 190.
18. Kutner, M. H. et al. 2004. Applied linear regression methods, (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill-Irwin.
19. Lehtilä, K. Strauss, S. 1997. Leaf damage by herbivores affects attractiveness to pollinators in wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum Oecologia 111 : 396 403.
20. Lehtilä, K. Strauss, S. 1999. Effects of foliar herbivory on male and female reproductive traits of wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum Ecology 80 : 116 124.
21. Leimu, R. Koricheva, J. 2006. A meta-analysis of tradeoffs between plant tolerance and resistance to herbivores: combining the evidence from ecological and agricultural studies Oikos 112 : 1 9.
22. Lennartsson, T. et al. 1997. Evidence for an evolutionary history of overcompensation in the grassland biennial Gentianella campestris (Gentianaceae). Am. Nat. 149 : 1147 1155.
23. Mabry, C. M. Wayne, P. W. 1997. Defoliation of the annual herb Abutilon theophrasti: mechanisms underlying reproductive compensation Oecologia 111 : 225 232.
24. Mauricio, R. et al. 1997. Variation in the defence strategies of plants: are resistance and tolerance mutually exclusive? Ecology 78 : 1301 1311.
25. Mothershead, K. Marquis, R. J. 2000. Fitness impacts of herbivory through indirect effects on plant-pollinator interactions in Oenothera macrocarpa Ecology 81 : 30 40.
26. Obeso, J. R. 2002. The costs of reproduction in plants New Phytol. 155 : 321 348.
27. Paige, K. N. Whitham, T. G. 1987. Flexible life history traits: shifts by scarlet gilia in respose to pollinator abundance Ecology 68 : 1691 1695.
28. Pilson, D. 2000. The evolution of plant response to herbivory: simultaneously considering resistance and tolerance in Brassica rapa. Evol. Ecol. 14 : 457 489.
29. Prout, T. Savolainen, O. 1996. Genotype-by-environment interaction is not sufficient to maintain variation: levene and the leafhopper. Am. Nat. 148 : 930 936.
30. Queller, D. 1997. Pollen removal, paternity, and the male function of flowers. Am. Nat. 149 : 585 594.
31. Roff, D. A. 1992. The evolution of life histories. Chapman and Hall.
32. Roff, D. A. 1997. Evolutionary quantitative genetics. Chapman and Hall.
33. Rosenthal, J. P. Kotanen, P. M. 1994. Terrestrial plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9 : 145 148.
34. Sampson, D. R. 1964. A one-locus self-incompatibility system in Raphanus raphanistrum. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 6 : 435 445.
35. Sharaf, K. E. Price, M. V. 2004. Does pollination limit tolerance to browsing in Ipomopsis aggregata? Oecologia 138 : 396 404.
36. Simms, E. Triplett, J. 1994. Cost and benefits of plant responses to disease: resistance and tolerance Evolution 48 : 1973 1985.
37. Stanton, M. et al. 1991. Consequences of floral variation for male and female reproduction in experimental populations of wild radish, Raphanus sativus L Evolution 45 : 268 280.
38. Stearns, S. 1992. The evolution of life histories. Oxford Univ. Press.
39. Stinchcombe, J. R. 2002. Environmental dependency in the expression of costs of tolerance to deer herbivory Evolution 56 : 1063 1067.
40. Stowe, K. A. 1998. Experimental evolution of resistance in Brassica rapa: correlated response of tolerance in lines selected for glucosinolate content Evolution 52 : 703 712.
41. Stowe, K. A. et al. 2000. The evolutionary ecology of tolerance to consumer damage. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31 : 565 595.
42. Strauss, S. Y. 1997. Floral characters link herbivores, pollinators, and plant fitness Ecology 78 : 1640 1645.
43. Strauss, S. Y. Agrawal, A. A. 1999. The ecology and evolution of plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14 : 179 185.
44. Strauss, S. Y. Murch, P. 2004. Towards an understanding of the mechanisms of tolerance: compensating for herbivore damage by enhancing a mutualism. Ecol. Entomol. 29 : 234 239.
45. Strauss, S. Y. et al. 2001. Effects of foliar herbivory by insects on the fitness of Raphanus raphanistrum: damage can increase male fitness. Am. Nat. 158 : 496 504.
46. Strauss, S. Y. et al. 2003. Predictors of male and female tolerance to insect herbivory in Raphanus raphanistrum Ecology 84 : 2074 2082.
47. Tiffin, P. 2000. Mechanisms of tolerance to herbivore damage: what do we know? Evol. Ecol. 14 : 523 536.
48. Tiffin, P. Rausher, M. D. 1999. Genetic constraints and selection acting on tolerance to herbivory in the common morning glory Ipomoea purpurea. Am. Nat. 154 : 700 716.
49. Trumble, J. T. et al. 1993. Plant compensation for arthropod herbivory. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 38 : 93 119.
50. van der Meijden, E. et al. 2000. Pattern of storage and regrowth in ragwort. Evol. Ecol. 14 : 439 455.
51. Weinig, C. et al. 2003. Evolutionary genetics of resistance and tolerance to natural herbivory in Arabidopsis thaliana Evolution 57 : 1270 1280.
52. Weltzin, J. F. et al. 1998. Defoliation and woody plant (shape Prosopis glandulosa) seedling regeneration: potential vs realized herbivory tolerance Plant Ecology. 138 : 127 135.
53. Wilson, P. et al. 1994. Beyond floral Batemania: gender biases in selection for pollination success. Am. Nat. 143 : 283 296.