ArticleOecologia2013
Importance of protein quality versus quantity in alternative host plants for a leaf-feeding insect.
Article in Oecologia, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Horizontally acquired cysteine synthase genes undergo functional divergence in lepidopteran herbivores.Heredity · 2021Article
- Acquiring nutrients from tree leaves: effects of leaf maturity and development type on a generalist caterpillar.Oecologia · 2017Article
- Which leaf mechanical traits correlate with insect herbivory among feeding guilds?Annals of botany · 2016Article
- Mechanisms and ecological consequences of plant defence induction and suppression in herbivore communities.Annals of botany · 2015Review
- Evolution in an ancient detoxification pathway is coupled with a transition to herbivory in the drosophilidae.Molecular biology and evolution · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The nutritional value of alternative host plants for leaf-feeding insects such as caterpillars is commonly measured in terms of protein quantity. However, nutritional value might also depend on the quality of the foliar protein [i.e., the composition of essential amino acids (EAAs)]. A lack of comparative work on the EAA compositions of herbivores and their host plants has hampered the testing of this hypothesis. We tested the "protein quality hypothesis" using the tree-feeding caterpillars of Lymantria dispar (gypsy moth) and two taxonomically unrelated host plants, red oak (Quercus rubra) and sugar maple (Acer saccharum). Because L. dispar has higher fitness on oak than on maple, support for the hypothesis would be found if protein were of higher quality from oak than from maple. The whole-body EAA composition of L. dispar larvae was measured to estimate its optimum dietary protein composition, which was compared with the EAA compositions of oak and maple leaves. Contrary to the protein quality hypothesis, the EAA compositions of oak and maple were not significantly different in the spring. The growth-limiting EAAs in both tree species were histidine and methionine. Similar results were observed in the summer, with the exception that the histidine composition of oak was between 10 and 15 % greater than in maple leaves. The two main factors that affected the nutritional value of protein from the tree species were the quantities of EAAs, which were consistently higher in oak, and the efficiency of EAA utilization, which decreased from 80 % in May to <50 % in August. We conclude that the relative nutritional value of red oak and sugar maple for L. dispar is more strongly affected by protein quantity than quality. Surveys of many wild herbaceous species also suggest that leaf-feeding insects would be unlikely to specialize on plants based on protein quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.