Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31632647›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2019

Rapid evolution of

Chandra N Jack, Maren L Friesen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Rapid evolution ofEcology and evolution · 2019
    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.

Chandra N JackDepartment of Plant Biology Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0167-1271
Maren L FriesenDepartment of Plant Biology Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4274-8928

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Enemy Release Hypothesis posits that invasion of novel habitats can be facilitated by the absence of coevolved herbivores. However, a new environment and interactions with unfamiliar herbivores may impose selection on invading plants for traits that reduce their attractiveness to herbivores or for enhanced defenses compared to native host plants, leading to a pattern similar to enemy release but driven by evolutionary change rather than ecological differences. The Shifting Defense Hypothesis posits that plants in novel habitats will shift from specialized defense mechanisms to defense mechanisms effective against generalist herbivores in the new range. We tested these ideas by comparing herbivore preference and performance of native (Eurasia)- and invasive (New World)-range

Indexed as

community ecologyinvasive plantsMedicago polymorphaplant–herbivore interactionsrapid evolution

Identifiers

PMID31632647
PMCPMC6787872

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.