Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34611747›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2022

Chemical Traits that Predict Susceptibility of Pinus radiata to Marsupial Bark Stripping.

Judith S Nantongo, Brad M Potts, Noel W Davies, Don Aurik, Stephen Elms, Hugh Fitzgerald, Julianne M O'Reilly-Wapstra

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Judith S NantongoSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia. Judith.Nantongo@utas.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7914-9139
Brad M PottsSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6244-289X
Noel W DaviesCentral Science Laboratory, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 74, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia.
Don AurikTimberlands Pacific Pty Ltd, Launceston, 7250, Australia.
Stephen ElmsHancock Victorian Plantations, Churchill, 3842, Australia.
Hugh FitzgeraldSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia.
Julianne M O'Reilly-WapstraSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4801-4412
University of Tasmania · AULaunceston General Hospital · AU

Funding

australian research council Linkage Grant, LP140100602
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bark stripping by mammals is a major problem in managed conifer forests worldwide. In Australia, bark stripping in the exotic plantations of Pinus radiata is mainly caused by native marsupials and results in reduced survival, growth, and in extreme cases death of trees. Herbivory is influenced by a balance between primary metabolites that are sources of nutrition and secondary metabolites that act as defences. Identifying the compounds that influence herbivory may be a useful tool in the management of forest systems. This study aimed to detect and identify both constitutive and induced compounds that are associated with genetic differences in susceptibility of two-year-old P. radiata trees to bark stripping by marsupials. An untargeted profiling of 83 primary and secondary compounds of the needles and bark samples from 21 susceptible and 21 resistant families was undertaken. These were among the most and least damaged families, respectively, screened in a trial of 74 families that were exposed to natural field bark stripping by marsupials. Experimental plants were in the same field trial but protected from bark stripping and a subset were subjected to artificial bark stripping to examine induced and constitutive chemistry differences between resistant and susceptible families. Machine learning (random forest), partial least squares plus discriminant analysis (PLS-DA), and principal components analysis with discriminant analysis (PCA-DA), as well as univariate methods were used to identify the most important totals by compound group and individual compounds differentiating the resistant and susceptible families. In the bark, the constitutive amount of two sesquiterpenoids - bicyclogermacrene and an unknown sesquiterpenoid alcohol -were shown to be of higher levels in the resistant families, whereas the constitutive sugars, fructose, and glucose, as well individual phenolics, were higher in the more susceptible families. The chemistry of the needles was not useful in differentiating the resistant and susceptible families to marsupial bark stripping. After artificial bark stripping, the terpenes, sugars, and phenolics responded in both the resistant and susceptible families by increasing or reducing amounts, which leveled the differences in the amounts of the compounds between the different resistant and susceptible classes observed at the constitutive level. Overall, based on the families with extreme values for less and more susceptibility, differences in the amounts of secondary compounds were subtle and susceptibility due to sugars may outweigh defence as the cause of the genetic variation in bark stripping observed in this non-native tree herbivory system.

Indexed as

MarsupialiaPinusAnimalsChild, PreschoolHerbivoryHumansPhenotypePlant BarkBark strippingDefencePinus radiataResistanceSugarsSusceptibilityTerpenes

Identifiers

PMID34611747
OpenAlexW3202803903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.