Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26445662›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2015

Quantity over quality: light intensity, but not red/far-red ratio, affects extrafloral nectar production in Senna mexicana var. chapmanii.

Ian M Jones, Suzanne Koptur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ian M JonesDepartment of Biological Sciences Florida International University Miami Florida.
Suzanne KopturDepartment of Biological Sciences Florida International University Miami Florida.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extrafloral nectar (EFN) mediates food-for-protection mutualisms between plants and insects and provides plants with a form of indirect defense against herbivory. Understanding sources of variation in EFN production is important because such variations affect the number and identity of insect visitors and the effectiveness of plant defense. Light represents a potentially crucial tool for regulating resource allocation to defense, as it not only contributes energy but may help plants to anticipate future conditions. Low red/far-red (R/FR) light ratios can act as a signal of the proximity of competing plants. Exposure to such light ratios has been shown to promote competitive behaviors that coincide with reduced resource allocation to direct chemical defenses. Little is known, however, about how such informational light signals might affect indirect defenses such as EFN, and the interactions that they mediate. Through controlled glasshouse experiments, we investigated the effects of light intensity, and R/FR light ratios, on EFN production in Senna mexicana var. chapmanii. Plants in light-limited conditions produced significantly less EFN, and leaf damage elicited increased EFN production regardless of light conditions. Ratios of R/FR light, however, did not appear to affect EFN production in either damaged or undamaged plants. Understanding the effects of light on indirect defenses is of particular importance for plants in the threatened pine rockland habitats of south Florida, where light conditions are changing in predictable ways following extensive fragmentation and subsequent mismanagement. Around 27% of species in these habitats produce EFN and may rely on insect communities for defense.

Indexed as

Extrafloral nectarFabaceaeplant defensesresource allocationSenna mexicana var. chapmanii

Identifiers

PMID26445662
PMCPMC4588640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.