ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2024
Neutrality in plant-herbivore interactions.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024. 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.
- Leaf Size Determines Damage- and Herbivore-Induced Volatile Emissions in Maize.Plant, cell & environment · 2025Article
- Neutrality in plant-herbivore interactions.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Understanding the distribution of herbivore damage among leaves and individual plants is a central goal of plant-herbivore biology. Commonly observed unequal patterns of herbivore damage have conventionally been attributed to the heterogeneity in plant quality or herbivore behaviour or distribution. Meanwhile, the potential role of stochastic processes in structuring plant-herbivore interactions has been overlooked. Here, we show that based on simple first principle expectations from metabolic theory, random sampling of different sizes of herbivores from a regional pool is sufficient to explain patterns of variation in herbivore damage. This is despite making the neutral assumption that herbivory is caused by randomly feeding herbivores on identical and passive plants. We then compared its predictions against 765 datasets of herbivory on 496 species across 116° of latitude from the Herbivory Variability Network. Using only one free parameter, the estimated attack rate, our neutral model approximates the observed frequency distribution of herbivore damage among plants and especially among leaves very well. Our results suggest that neutral stochastic processes play a large and underappreciated role in natural variation in herbivory and may explain the low predictability of herbivory patterns. We argue that such prominence warrants its consideration as a powerful force in plant-herbivore interactions.
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.