Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28105030›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2016

Get Tough, Get Toxic, or Get a Bodyguard: Identifying Candidate Traits Conferring Belowground Resistance to Herbivores in Grasses.

Ben D Moore, Scott N Johnson

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Natural Resistance to and Attraction of the Cabbage Root Fly (Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ben D MooreHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University Richmond, NSW, Australia.
Scott N JohnsonHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University Richmond, NSW, Australia.
Western Sydney University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Grasses (Poaceae) are the fifth-largest plant family by species and their uses for crops, forage, fiber, and fuel make them the most economically important. In grasslands, which broadly-defined cover 40% of the Earth's terrestrial surface outside of Greenland and Antarctica, 40-60% of net primary productivity and 70-98% of invertebrate biomass occurs belowground, providing extensive scope for interactions between roots and rhizosphere invertebrates. Grasses invest 50-70% of fixed carbon into root construction, which suggests roots are high value tissues that should be defended from herbivores, but we know relatively little about such defenses. In this article, we identify candidate grass root defenses, including physical (tough) and chemical (toxic) resistance traits, together with indirect defenses involving recruitment of root herbivores' natural enemies. We draw on relevant literature to establish whether these defenses are present in grasses, and specifically in grass roots, and which herbivores of grasses are affected by these defenses. Physical defenses could include structural macro-molecules such as lignin, cellulose, suberin, and callose in addition to silica and calcium oxalate. Root hairs and rhizosheaths, a structural adaptation unique to grasses, might also play defensive roles. To date, only lignin and silica have been shown to negatively affect root herbivores. In terms of chemical resistance traits, nitrate, oxalic acid, terpenoids, alkaloids, amino acids, cyanogenic glycosides, benzoxazinoids, phenolics, and proteinase inhibitors have the potential to negatively affect grass root herbivores. Several good examples demonstrate the existence of indirect defenses in grass roots, including maize, which can recruit entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs) via emission of (E)-β-caryophyllene, and similar defenses are likely to be common. In producing this review, we aimed to equip researchers with candidate root defenses for further research.

Indexed as

benzoxazinoidsindirect defencephysical defenceplant secondary metabolitesPoaceaeroot defenseroot herbivorysilica

Identifiers

PMID28105030
PMCPMC5214545
OpenAlexW2569729793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.