ArticlePlanta2020
Oral cues are not enough: induction of defensive proteins in Nicotiana tabacum upon feeding by caterpillars.
Article in Planta, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence of Rapid Evolution in Herbivory Defense Responses With Conserved Trade-Offs in Populations ofEcology and evolution · 2025Article
- Molecular tug-of-war: Plant immune recognition of herbivory.The Plant cell · 2022Review
- Salivary surprise: Symmerista caterpillars anoint petioles with red saliva after clipping leaves.PloS one · 2022Article
- Comparing Exogenous Methods to Induce Plant-Resistance Against a Bark-Feeding Insect.Frontiers in plant science · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
MAIN
conclusionThe study challenges the general belief that plants are highly sensitive to oral cues of herbivores and reveals the role of the damage level on the magnitude of defense induction. Many leaf-feeding caterpillars share similar feeding behaviors involving repeated removal of previously wounded leaf tissue (semicircle feeding pattern). We hypothesized that this behavior is a strategy to attenuate plant-induced defenses by removing both the oral cues and tissues that detect it. Using tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) and the tobacco hornworm (Manduca sexta), we found that tobacco increased defensive responses during herbivory compared to mechanical wounding at moderate damage levels (30%). However, tobacco did not differentiate between mechanical wounding and herbivory when the level of leaf tissue loss was either small (4%) or severe (100%, whole leaf removal). Higher amounts of oral cues did not induce higher defenses when damage was small. Severe damage led to the highest level of systemic defense proteins compared to other levels of leaf tissue loss with or without oral cues. In conclusion, we did not find clear evidence that semicircle feeding behavior compromises plant defense induction. In addition, the level of leaf tissue loss and oral cues interact to determine the level of induced defensive responses in tobacco. Although oral cues play an important role in inducing defensive proteins, the level of induction depends more on the level of leaf tissue loss in tobacco.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.