, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 64–68 | Cite as

The geographical distribution of plant latex

  • Thomas M. Lewinsohn
Mini review


Latex is a widespread defence in plants against natural enemies and a literature-based summary of latex-producing angiosperms shows records in 40 families, and more than 20,000 species are estimated to bear laticiferous structures of some kind. This is considerably higher than the usually quoted figure of 12,500 species. There are more tropical than temperate latex-bearing families, both in absolute numbers and proportionally. Proportions of latex-bearing families are similar both in tropical and in more widespread or cosmopolitan families. Significantly more latex-bearing species belong to tropical than either to temperate or to widespread taxa, both in absolute and in relative terms. These differences may be related to the higher diversity of natural enemy species and to higher rates of herbivory in the tropics.

Key words

latex plant defence antiherbivore defence ecogeography latitudinal gradient laticifers 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agresti A (1990) Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John WileyGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen ON, Allen EK (1981) The Leguminosae. A Sourcebook of Characteristics, Uses and Nodulation. London: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  3. Archer BL, Audley BG (1973) Rubber, gutta percha and chicle. Pp 310–343in Miller LP (ed) Phytochemistry. Vol. II: Organic Metabolites. New York: Van Nostrand ReinholdGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlquist S (1958) Anatomy of Guayana Mutisieae. II. Mem NY Bot Gdn 10:157–184Google Scholar
  5. Coley PD, Bryant JP, Chapin III FS (1985) Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science 230:895–899Google Scholar
  6. Coley PD, Aide TM (1991) Comparison of herbivory and plant defenses in temperate and tropical broad-leaved forests. Pp 5–49in Price PW, Lewinsohn TM, Fernandes GW, Benson WW (eds) Plant-Animal Interactions: Evolutionary Ecology in Tropical and Temperate Regions. New York: John WileyGoogle Scholar
  7. Compton SG (1987)Aganais speciosa andDanaus chrysippus (Lepidoptera) sabotage the latex defences of their host plants. Ecol Entomol 12:115–118Google Scholar
  8. Cronquist A (1981) An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants. New York: Columbia Univ PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Dussourd DE (1990) The vein drain; or, how insects outsmart plants. Nat Hist 90:44–49Google Scholar
  10. Dussourd DE, Eisner T (1987) Vein-cutting behavior: insect counterploy to the latex defense of plants. Science 237:898–901Google Scholar
  11. Esau K (1965) Plant Anatomy. 2nd edn. New York: John WileyGoogle Scholar
  12. Fahn A (1979) Secretory Tissues in Plants. London: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Fahn A (1990) Plant Anatomy. 4th ed. Oxford: Pergamon PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Farrell BD, Dussourd DE, Mitter C (1991) Escalation of plant defense: do latex/resin canals spur plant diversification? Am Nat: in pressGoogle Scholar
  15. Feeny P (1975) Biochemical coevolution between plants and their insect herbivores. Pp 3–19in Gilbert LE, Raven PH (eds) Coevolution of Animals and Plants. Austin: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar
  16. Fraenkel G (1959) The raison d'etre of secondary plant substances. Science 129:1466–1470Google Scholar
  17. French JC (1988) Systematic occurrence of anastomosing laticifers in Araceae. Bot Gaz 149:71–81Google Scholar
  18. Good R (1974) The Geography of Flowering Plants. 4th ed. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
  19. Heywood VR (ed.) (1978) Flowering Plants of the World. Oxford: Oxford Univ PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Kapoor LD (1969) Lacticiferous vessels in some Papaveraceae. Pp 207–218in Chowdhury KA (ed) Recent Advances in the Anatomy of Tropical Seed Plants. Delhi: Hindustan Publ Co.Google Scholar
  21. Keating RC (1970) Comparative anatomy of the Cochlospermaceae II. Anatomy of the young vegetative shoot. Am J Bot 57:889–898Google Scholar
  22. Levin DA (1976) Alkaloid-bearing plants: an ecogeographic perspective. Am Nat 110:261–284Google Scholar
  23. Levin DA, York BM (1978) The toxicity of plant alkaloids: an ecogeographic perspective. Biochem Syst Ecol 6:61–76Google Scholar
  24. Lewinsohn TM, Vasconcellos-Neto J (1980) Alimentação de crisomelídeos em Asclepiadaceas: um comportamento que reduz a ingestão de substâncias tóxicas. Ciencia e Cultura 32 (Suppl.):497Google Scholar
  25. Lewinsohn TM, Vasconcellos-Neto J (1985) Convergência comportamental e padrões coevolutivos de insetos folívoros em plantas latescentes. XII Congresso Brasileiro de Zoologia, Campinas, Resumos: 152–153Google Scholar
  26. Mabberley DJ (1987) The Plant Book: A Portable Dictionary of the Higher Plants. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Metcalfe CR (1967) Distribution of latex in the plant kingdom. Econ Bot 21:115–127Google Scholar
  28. Metcalfe CR (1983) Laticifers and latex. Pp 70–81in Metcalfe CR. Anatomy of Dicotyledons. 2nd ed. Vol. II. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
  29. Oliveira PS, Oliveira-Filho AT (1991) Distribution of extrafloral nectaries in the woody flora of tropical communities in western Brazil. Pp 163–175in Price PW, Lewinsohn TM, Fernandes GW, Benson WW (eds) Plant-Animal Interactions: Evolutionary Ecology in Tropical and Temperate Regions. New York: John WileyGoogle Scholar
  30. Rhoades DF, Cates RG (1976) Towards a general theory of plant antiherbivore chemistry. Rec Adv Phytochem 10:168–213Google Scholar
  31. Rosenthal GA, Janzen DH (eds) (1979) Herbivores; Their Interaction with Secondary Plant Metabolites. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  32. Rizzini CT (1971) Arvores e Madeiras Úteis do Brazil. São Paulo: BlucherGoogle Scholar
  33. Rizzini CT, Mors WB (1976) Botânica Econômica Brasileira. São Paulo: Ed. Pedagógica Universitária and Ed. Universidade de São PauloGoogle Scholar
  34. Ruddall PJ (1987) Laticifers in Euphorbiaceae — a conspectus. Bot J Linn Soc 94:143–163Google Scholar
  35. Sleumer HO (1980) Flacourtiaceae. Flora Neotrop 22:1–499Google Scholar
  36. Stebbins GL (1974) Flowering Plants. Evolution Above the Species Level. London: Edward ArnoldGoogle Scholar
  37. Tippo O (1938) Comparative anatomy of the Moraceae and their presumed allies. Bot Gaz 100:1–99Google Scholar
  38. Valente MC (1974) Observações sobre a anatomia deEcclinusa balata Ducke. Rodriguesia: 27:7–24Google Scholar
  39. Van Die J (1955) A comparative study of the particle fractions from Apocynaceae latices. Ann Bogor 2:1–124Google Scholar
  40. Webster GL (1975) Conspectus of a new classification of the Euphorbiaceae. Taxon 24:593–601Google Scholar
  41. Webster GL (1987) The saga of the spurges: a review of classification and relationships in the Euphorbiales. Bot J Linn Soc 94:3–46Google Scholar
  42. Wilder GJ, Harris DH (1982) Laticifers inCyclanthus bipartitus Poit. (Cyclanthaceae). Bot Gaz 143:84–93Google Scholar
  43. Willis JC (1973) A Dictionary of the Flowering Plants and Ferns. 8th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas M. Lewinsohn
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratório de Interações Insetos/Plantas, Departamento ZoologiaUNICAMPCampinasBrazil
  2. 2.NERC Centre for Population BiologyImperial CollegeAscot, BerkshireUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations