Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28835618›Full record

ArticleNature communications2017

Identification of an insect-produced olfactory cue that primes plant defenses.

Anjel M Helms, Consuelo M De Moraes, Armin Tröger, Hans T Alborn, Wittko Francke, John F Tooker, Mark C Mescher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. The EndophyteFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Anjel M HelmsCenter for Chemical Ecology, Department of Entomology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Consuelo M De MoraesDepartment of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, 8092, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6737-9842
Armin TrögerInstitute for Organic Chemistry, University of Hamburg, 20146, Hamburg, Germany.
Hans T AlbornChemistry Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Gainesville, FL, 32608, USA.
Wittko FranckeInstitute for Organic Chemistry, University of Hamburg, 20146, Hamburg, Germany.
John F TookerCenter for Chemical Ecology, Department of Entomology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Mark C MescherDepartment of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, 8092, Zürich, Switzerland. mescher@usys.ethz.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7908-3309
ETH Zurich · CHPennsylvania State University · USUniversität Hamburg · DEAgricultural Research Service · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is increasingly clear that plants perceive and respond to olfactory cues. Yet, knowledge about the specificity and sensitivity of such perception remains limited. We previously documented priming of anti-herbivore defenses in tall goldenrod plants (Solidago altissima) by volatile emissions from a specialist herbivore, the goldenrod gall fly (Eurosta solidaginis). Here, we explore the specific chemical cues mediating this interaction. We report that E,S-conophthorin, the most abundant component of the emission of male flies, elicits a priming response equivalent to that observed for the overall blend. Furthermore, while the strength of priming is dose dependent, plants respond even to very low concentrations of E,S-conophthorin relative to typical fly emissions. Evaluation of other blend components yields results consistent with the hypothesis that priming in this interaction is mediated by a single compound. These findings provide insights into the perceptual capabilities underlying plant defense priming in response to olfactory cues.Plants are able to prime anti-herbivore defenses in response to olfactory cues of insect pests. Here, Helms et al. identify the insect pheromone E,S-conophthorin produced by the goldenrod gall fly as the specific chemical component that elicits this priming response in goldenrod plants.

Indexed as

CuesAnimalsHerbivoryHost-Parasite InteractionsMaleOlfactory BulbPheromonesSolidagoSpiro CompoundsTephritidaeVolatile Organic CompoundsConophthorinPheromonesSpiro CompoundsVolatile Organic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID28835618
PMCPMC5569085
OpenAlexW2745635474

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.