Plant age, communication, and resistance to herbivores: young sagebrush plants are better emitters and receivers
- 371 Downloads
Plants progress through a series of distinct stages during development, although the role of plant ontogeny in their defenses against herbivores is poorly understood. Recent work indicates that many plants activate systemic induced resistance after herbivore attack, although the relationship between resistance and ontogeny has not been a focus of this work. In addition, for sagebrush and a few other species, individuals near neighbors that experience simulated herbivory become more resistant to subsequent attack. Volatile, airborne cues are required for both systemic induced resistance among branches and for communication among individuals. We conducted experiments in stands of sagebrush of mixed ages to determine effects of plant age on volatile signaling between branches and individuals. Young and old control plants did not differ in levels of chewing damage that they experienced. Systemic induced resistance among branches was only observed for young plants. Young plants showed strong evidence of systemic resistance only if airflow was permitted among branches; plants with only vascular connections showed no systemic resistance. We also found evidence for volatile communication between individuals. For airborne communication, young plants were more effective emitters of cues as well as more responsive receivers of volatile cues.
KeywordsArtemisia tridentata Defense Development Eavesdropping Induced resistance
This research was supported by a grant from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. Fieldwork was conducted at the University of California Sagehen Creek Reserve and on adjacent land in Tahoe National Forest. We thank Dr Junji Takabayashi, Dr Hitoshi Nishimura, Dr Goku Takimoto, Aki Fujimoto, and Jeff Brown for facilitating our fieldwork. This manuscript was improved by Mikaela Huntzinger and Andy McCall.
- Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.Google Scholar
- Bryant JP, Kuropat PJ, Reichardt PB, Clausen TP (1991) Controls over the allocation of resources by woody plants to chemical antiherbivore defense. In: Palo RT, Robbins CT (eds) Plant defenses against mammalian herbivory. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., pp 83–102Google Scholar
- Fernandes GW (1990) Hypersensitivity: a neglected plant resistance mechanism against insect herbivores. Environ Entomol 19:1173–1182Google Scholar
- Fernandes GW (1998) Hypersensitivity as a phenotypic basis of plant induced resistance against a galling insect (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae). Environ Entomol 27:260–267Google Scholar
- Gianoli E (2002) A phenotypic trade-off between constitutive defenses and induced responses in wheat seedlings. Ecoscience 9:482–488Google Scholar
- Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
- Kessler A, Halitschke R, Diezel C, Baldwin IT (2006) Priming of plant defense responses in nature by airborne signaling between Artemisia tridentata and Nicotiana attenuata. OecologiaGoogle Scholar
- Kramer PJ, Kozlowski TT (1979) Physiology of woody plants. Academic, Orlando, Fla.Google Scholar