Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26872949›Full record

ArticlePlant physiology2016

Herbivore-Triggered Electrophysiological Reactions: Candidates for Systemic Signals in Higher Plants and the Challenge of Their Identification.

Matthias R Zimmermann, Axel Mithöfer, Torsten Will, Hubert H Felle, Alexandra C U Furch

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
22.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Measurement of Phloem-Based Electrical Signals in Plants.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Simulated Analysis of Influence of Changes in HPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  17. Calcium Signaling in Plant-Insect Interactions.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthias R ZimmermannInstitute of General Botany and Plant Physiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University, D-07743 Jena, Germany (M.R.Z., A.C.U.F.);Department of Bioorganic Chemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany (A.M.);Plant Cell Biology Research Group, Institute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (T.W.); andInstitute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (H.H.F.) matthias.r.zimmermann@bot1.bio.uni-giessen.de.
Axel MithöferInstitute of General Botany and Plant Physiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University, D-07743 Jena, Germany (M.R.Z., A.C.U.F.);Department of Bioorganic Chemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany (A.M.);Plant Cell Biology Research Group, Institute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (T.W.); andInstitute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (H.H.F.).ORCID 0000-0001-5229-6913
Torsten WillInstitute of General Botany and Plant Physiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University, D-07743 Jena, Germany (M.R.Z., A.C.U.F.);Department of Bioorganic Chemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany (A.M.);Plant Cell Biology Research Group, Institute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (T.W.); andInstitute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (H.H.F.).
Hubert H FelleInstitute of General Botany and Plant Physiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University, D-07743 Jena, Germany (M.R.Z., A.C.U.F.);Department of Bioorganic Chemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany (A.M.);Plant Cell Biology Research Group, Institute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (T.W.); andInstitute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (H.H.F.).
Alexandra C U FurchInstitute of General Botany and Plant Physiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University, D-07743 Jena, Germany (M.R.Z., A.C.U.F.);Department of Bioorganic Chemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany (A.M.);Plant Cell Biology Research Group, Institute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (T.W.); andInstitute of General Botany, Justus-Liebig-University, D-35390 Gießen, Germany (H.H.F.).
Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DEFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DEInstitute of Botany · AMMax Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In stressed plants, electrophysiological reactions (elRs) are presumed to contribute to long-distance intercellular communication between distant plant parts. Because of the focus on abiotic stress-induced elRs in recent decades, biotic stress-triggered elRs have been widely ignored. It is likely that the challenge to identify the particular elR types (action potential [AP], variation potential, and system potential [SP]) was responsible for this course of action. Thus, this survey focused on insect larva feeding (Spodoptera littoralis and Manduca sexta) that triggers distant APs, variation potentials, and SPs in monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plant species (Hordeum vulgare, Vicia faba, and Nicotiana tabacum). APs were detected only after feeding on the stem/culm, whereas SPs were observed systemically following damage to both stem/culm and leaves. This was attributed to the unequal vascular innervation of the plant and a selective electrophysiological connectivity of the plant tissue. However, striking variations in voltage patterns were detected for each elR type. Further analyses (also in Brassica napus and Cucurbita maxima) employing complementary electrophysiological approaches in response to different stimuli revealed various reasons for these voltage pattern variations: an intrinsic plasticity of elRs, a plant-specific signature of elRs, a specific influence of the applied (a)biotic trigger, the impact of the technical approach, and/or the experimental setup. As a consequence, voltage pattern variations, which are not irregular but rather common, need to be included in electrophysiological signaling analysis. Due to their widespread occurrence, systemic propagation, and respective triggers, elRs should be considered as candidates for long-distance communication in higher plants.

Indexed as

Electrophysiological PhenomenaAction PotentialsAnimalsHerbivoryHordeumManducaModels, BiologicalNicotianaPlant LeavesPlant Vascular BundleSpodopteraVicia faba

Identifiers

PMID26872949
PMCPMC4825135
OpenAlexW2266154522

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.