Growth-defense tradeoffs for two major anti-herbivore traits of the common milkweed Asclepias syriaca

Oikos

Volumn 124, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 1404-1415

  Züst, Tobias ^a   Rasmann, Sergio ^b   Agrawal, Anurag A ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIHERBIVORE DEFENSE; GROWTH RATE; HERB; HERBIVORY; LEAF AREA; NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY; PLANT DEFENSE; PLANT-HERBIVORE INTERACTION; STEROID;

ASCLEPIAS SYRIACA;

EID: 84942821032     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/oik.02075     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Agrawal, A. A. 2005. Natural selection on common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) by a community of specialized insect herbivores. - Evol. Ecol. Res. 7: 651-667.
2. Agrawal, A. A. and Fishbein, M. 2006. Plant defense syndromes. - Ecology 87: S132-S149.
3. Agrawal, A. A. and Konno, K. 2009. Latex: a model for understanding mechanisms, ecology and evolution of plant defense against herbivory. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40: 311-331.
4. Agrawal, A. A. et al. 2012a. Attenuation of the jasmonate burst, plant defensive traits, and resistance to specialist monarch caterpillars on shaded common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca). - J. Chem. Ecol. 38: 893-901.
5. Agrawal, A. A. et al. 2012b. Insect herbivores drive real-time ecological and evolutionary change in plant populations. - Science 338: 113-116.
6. Agrawal, A. A. et al. 2012c. Toxic cardenolides: chemical ecology and coevolution of specialized plant-herbivore interactions. - New Phytol. 194: 28-45.
7. Bingham, R. A. and Agrawal, A. A. 2010. Specificity and tradeoffs in the induced plant defence of common milkweed Asclepias syriaca to two lepidopteran herbivores. - J. Ecol. 98: 1014-1022.
8. Buttery, B. R. and Boatman, S. G. 1976. Water deficits and flow of latex. - In: Kozlovski, T. T. (ed.), Water deficits and plant growth. Academic Press, pp. 233-289.
9. Cipollini, D. et al. 2014. Costs of resistance in plants: from theory to evidence. Annual Plant Reviews Vol. 47: Insect-plant interactions. Wiley, pp. 263-307.
10. Evans, G. C. 1972. The quantitative analysis of plant growth. - Blackwell.
11. Fakheran, S. et al. 2010. Adaptation and extinction in experimentally fragmented landscapes. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107: 19120-19125.
12. Gershenzon, J. 1994. Metabolic costs of terpenoid accumulation in higher plants. - J. Chem. Ecol. 20: 1281-1328.
13. Gold, J. J. and Shore, J. S. 1995. Multiple paternity in Asclepias syriaca using a paired-fruit analysis. - Can. J. Bot. 73: 1212-1216.
14. Groeneveld, H. W. et al. 1990. Cardenolide biosynthesis from malonate in Asclepias curassavica. - Phytochemistry 29: 3479-3486.
15. Hamilton, J. G. et al. 2001. The carbon-nutrient balance hypothesis: its rise and fall. - Ecol. Lett. 4: 86-95.
16. Herms, D. A. and Mattson, W. J. 1992. The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. - Q. Rev. Biol. 67: 283-335.
17. Hoffmann, W. A. and Poorter, H. 2002. Avoiding bias in calculations of relative growth rate. - Ann. Bot. 90: 37-42.
18. Hunt, R. 1982. Plant growth curves: a functional approach to plant growth analysis. - Edward Arnold.
19. Hunt, R. and Cornelissen, J. H. C. 1997. Components of relative growth rate and their interrelations in 59 temperate plant species. - New Phytol. 135: 395-417.
20. Jasienski, M. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1999. The fallacy of ratios and the testability of models in biology. - Oikos 84: 321-326.
21. Koricheva, J. 1999. Interpreting phenotypic variation in plant allelochemistry: problems with the use of concentrations. - Oecologia 119: 467-473.
22. Koricheva, J. 2002. Meta-analysis of sources of variation in fitness costs of plant antiherbivore defenses. - Ecology 83: 176-190.
23. McDonald, A. J. S. 1990. Phenotypic variation in growth rate as affected by N-supply: its effects in net assimilation rate (NAR), leaf weight ratio (LWR) and specific leaf area (SLA). - In: Lambers, H. et al. (eds), Causes and consequences of variation in growth rate and productivity of higher plants. SPB Academic Publishing, pp. 35-44.
24. Paine, C. E. T. et al. 2012. How to fit nonlinear plant growth models and calculate growth rates: an update for ecologists. - Meth. Ecol. Evol. 3: 245-256.
25. Parker, J. D. et al. 2012. Evolutionary potential of root chemical defense: genetic correlations with shoot chemistry and plant growth. - J. Chem. Ecol. 38: 992-995.
26. Paul-Victor, C. et al. 2010. A new method for measuring relative growth rate can uncover the costs of defensive compounds in Arabidopsis thaliana. - New Phytol. 187: 1102-1111.
27. Pinheiro, J. C. and Bates, D. M. 2000. Mixed-effects models in S and S-Plus. - Springer.
28. Pinheiro, J. C. et al. 2013. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. - R package ver. 3.1-113.
29. Poorter, H. 1990. Interspecific variation in relative growth rate: on ecological causes and physiological consequences. - In: Lambers, H. et al. (eds), Causes and consequences of variation in growth rate and productivity of higher plants. SPB Academic Publishing, pp. 45-68.
30. Poorter, H. and Remkes, C. 1990. Leaf area ratio and net assimilation rate of 24 wild species differing in relative growth rate. - Oecologia 83: 553-559.
31. Potter, J. R. and Jones, J. W. 1977. Leaf area partitioning as an important factor in growth. - Plant Physiol. 59: 10-14.
32. Rasband, W. S. 1997-2014. Image J. - US Natl Inst. of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
33. Rasmann, S. and Agrawal, A. A. 2011. Latitudinal patterns in plant defense: evolution of cardenolides, their toxicity and induction following herbivory. - Ecol. Lett. 14: 476-483.
34. Rasmann, S. et al. 2009. Induced responses to herbivory and jasmonate in three milkweed species. - J. Chem. Ecol. 35: 1326-1334.
35. Rasmann, S. et al. 2011. Direct and indirect root defences of milkweed (Asclepias syriaca): trophic cascades, tradeoffs and novel methods for studying subterranean herbivory. - J. Ecol. 99: 16-25.
36. Rausher, M. D. 1996. Genetic analysis of coevolution between plants and their natural enemies. - Trends Genet. 12: 212-217.
37. Rees, M. et al. 2010. Partitioning the components of relative growth rate: how important is plant size variation? - Am. Nat. 176: E152-E161.
38. Rose, K. E. et al. 2009. The costs and benefits of fast living. - Ecol. Lett. 12: 1379-1384.
39. Schädler, M. et al. 2003. Palatability, decomposition and insect herbivory: patterns in a successional old-field plant community. - Oikos 103: 121-132.
40. Siemens, D. H. and Mitchell-Olds, T. 1998. Evolution of pest-induced defenses in Brassica plants: tests of theory. - Ecology 79: 632-646.
41. Simms, E. L. 1992. Costs of plant resistance to herbivory. - In: Fritz, R. S. and Simms, E. L. (eds), Plant resistance to herbivores and pathogens: ecology, evolution and genetics. Univ. of Chicago Press, pp. 392-425.
42. Turnbull, L. A. et al. 2008. Growth rates, seed size, and physiology: do small-seeded species really grow faster? - Ecology 89: 1352-1363.
43. Underwood, N. 2007. Variation in and correlation between intrinsic rate of increase and carrying capacity. - Am. Nat. 169: 136-141.
44. Vannette, R. L. et al. 2013. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi alter above- and below-ground chemical defense expression differentially among Asclepias species. - Front. Plant Sci. 4: 361.
45. Zangerl, A. R. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1992. Theory and pattern in plant defense allocation. - In: Fritz, R. S. and Simms, E. L. (eds), Plant resistance to herbivores and pathogens: ecology, evolution and genetics. Univ. of Chicago Press, pp. 363-391.
46. Zavala, J. A. et al. 2004. Constitutive and inducible trypsin proteinase inhibitor production incurs large fitness costs in Nicotiana attenuata. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101: 1607-1612.
47. Züst, T. et al. 2011. Using knockout mutants to reveal the costs of defensive traits. - Proc. R. Soc. B 278: 2598-2603.
48. Züst, T. et al. 2012. Natural enemies drive geographic variation in plant defenses. - Science 338: 116-119.
49. Zuur, A. F. et al. 2009. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. - Springer.