ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2018
Clonal Saplings of Trembling Aspen Do Not Coordinate Defense Induction.
Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clonal integration of stress signal induces morphological and physiological response of root within clonal network.PloS one · 2024Article
- Root Secondary Metabolites in Populus tremuloides: Effects of Simulated Climate Warming, Defoliation, and Genotype.Journal of chemical ecology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Induction of plant chemical defenses in response to insect feeding may be localized to the site of damage or expressed systemically, mediated by signal transduction throughout the plant. Such systemic induction processes have been widely investigated in plants with single stems, but rarely in clonal plants comprised of multiple ramets with vascular connections. For a clonal tree species such as trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx), integration of induced defense within clones could be adaptive, as clones are spatially extensive and susceptible to outbreak herbivores. We used pairs of aspen saplings with shared roots, replicated from three genotypes, to determine whether defense-induction signals are communicated within clones. One ramet in each pair was subjected to a damage treatment (feeding by Lymantria dispar, followed by mechanical damage), and subsequent changes in leaf defensive chemistry were measured in both ramets. Responses to damage varied by defense type: condensed tannins (CTs) increased in damaged ramets but not in connected undamaged ramets, whereas salicinoid phenolic glycosides (SPGs) were not induced in any ramets. Genotypes varied in their levels of CTs, but not in their levels of SPGs, and responded similarly to damage treatment. These results suggest that, even with both vascular and volatile information available, young aspen ramets do not induce defenses based on signals or metabolites from other ramets. Thus, unlike other clonal plant species, aspen do not appear to coordinate defense induction within clones. Lack of coordinated early induction in aspen may be related to the function of CTs in tolerance, rather than resistance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30109458What 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.