ArticleOecologia2021
Domestication does not alter invasion risk of a non-native legume.
Article in Oecologia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most non-native domesticated plants provide benefits without escaping cultivation, but others have become prominent invaders. A better understanding of how domestication might alter plant traits that influence the ability of species to overcome barriers to invasion could improve invasion risk predictions. We explored how variation in foliar chemistry among cultivars of a widespread invader in the U.S. (Lespedeza cuneata) might influence invasion risk through differences in herbivore interactions and a potential tradeoff with competitive ability. In a no-choice feeding bioassay a generalist herbivore performed better when fed cultivars compared to wild genotypes and native congeners, suggesting domesticated L. cuneata may be more vulnerable to herbivory compared to wild genotypes. However, in a factorial greenhouse experiment, with treatments of herbivory and competition, all cultivars had similar seed and biomass production as the wild genotype. Competition with native species reduced productivity of all L. cuneata types, while experimental herbivory alone did not. We also found far less variation in foliar chemistry among L. cuneata types than expected based on domestication history. While our findings from the bioassay suggest potentially lower invasion risk for cultivars if herbivore populations expand more rapidly when feeding on cultivars, we did not find evidence that cultivars had different responses to herbivory or competition with native species in the greenhouse experiment. Altogether, the findings from our multi-pronged approach for evaluating potential factors underlying invasion success of a domesticated species indicate that domestication has not altered invasion risk of this widespread plant invader.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33576901What 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.