Advertisement

Testing the shifting defense hypothesis for constitutive and induced resistance and tolerance

  • 226 Accesses

Abstract

Biogeographical variation in herbivore communities may drive invasive plants to evolve lower defense against specialist herbivores but higher defense against generalist herbivores (shifting defense hypothesis, SDH). However, empirical tests on this topic have been strongly biased toward examining constitutive resistance and less is known about the evolution of induced resistance and tolerance. We examined constitutive and induced resistance and tolerance of the invasive plant, Alternanthera philoxeroides (alligator weed, Centrospermae: Amaranthaceae) against the specialist herbivore Agasicles hygrophila (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) and the generalist herbivore Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), using genotypes from its introduced and native ranges. We found that introduced genotypes, compared to native genotypes, had higher constitutive resistance to the generalist herbivore, but similar constitutive resistance to the specialist herbivore. Furthermore, introduced genotypes, compared to native genotypes, had lower induced resistance to the generalist herbivore, but similar induced resistance to the specialist herbivore. Moreover, although introduced and native genotypes did not differ in their tolerance to the generalist, the introduced genotypes exhibited lower tolerance to the specialist than native ones. Therefore, while individual defense strategy does not indicate a shift from defense against the specialist to defense against the generalist, the results for the different defense strategies jointly support the SDH.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Abhilasha D, Joshi J (2009) Enhanced fitness due to higher fecundity, increased defence against a specialist and tolerance towards a generalist herbivore in an invasive annual plant. J Plant Ecol 2:77–86. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rtp008

  2. Ali JG, Agrawal AA (2012) Specialist versus generalist insect herbivores and plant defense. Trends Plant Sci 17:293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2012.02.006

  3. Bates D, Machler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC (2015) Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48

  4. Bossdorf O, Schroder S, Prati D, Auge H (2004) Palatability and tolerance to simulated herbivory in native and introduced populations of Alliaria petiolata (Brassicaceae). Am J Bot 91:856–862. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.91.6.856

  5. Cabrera N, Sosa AJ, Julien M (2013) Phenrica littoralis (Bechyne, 1955) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) a potential candidate for the biological control of alligator weed, Alternanthera philoxeroides (Martius) Grisebach (Amaranthaceae): redescription of the adult, first description of immature stages, and biological notes. Zootaxa 3686:543–555. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3686.5.3

  6. Cao L, Yang F, Tang S, Chen M (2014) Development of an artificial diet for three Lepidopteran insects. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology 51:1376–1386. https://doi.org/10.7679/j.issn.2095-1353.2014.165

  7. Carmona D, Fornoni J (2013) Herbivores can select for mixed defensive strategies in plants. New Phytol 197:576–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12023

  8. Cripps MG, Hinz HL, McKenney JL, Price WJ, Schwarzlaender M (2009) No evidence for an 'evolution of increased competitive ability' for the invasive Lepidium draba. Basic Appl Ecol 10:103–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2008.03.001

  9. De Mendiburu F (2009) Una herramienta de analisis estadistico para la investigacion agricola, Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria (UNI-PERU)

  10. Dong BC, van Kleunen M, Yu FH (2018) Context-dependent parental effects on clonal offspring performance. Front Plant Sci 9:10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01824

  11. Doorduin LJ, Vrieling K (2011) A review of the phytochemical support for the shifting defence hypothesis. Phytochem Rev 10:99–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-010-9195-8

  12. Faizal A, Geelen D (2013) Saponins and their role in biological processes in plants. Phytochem Rev 12:877–893. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-013-9322-4

  13. Fornoni J, Valverde PL, Nunez-Farfan J (2004) Population variation in the cost and benefit of tolerance and resistance against herbivory in Datura stramonium. Evolution 58:1696–1704

  14. Fortuna TM, Eckert S, Harvey JA, Vet LEM, Muller C, Gols R (2014) Variation in plant defences among populations of a range-expanding plant: consequences for trophic interactions. New Phytol 204:989–999. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12983

  15. Geng YP, van Klinken RD, Sosa A, Li B, Chen JK, Xu CY (2016) The relative importance of genetic diversity and phenotypic plasticity in determining invasion success of a clonal weed in the USA and China. Front Plant Sci 7:213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00213

  16. Haukioja E, Koricheva J (2000) Tolerance to herbivory in woody vs. herbaceous plants. Evol Ecol 14:551–562. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1011091606022

  17. Huang W, Siemann E, Wheeler GS, Zou J, Carrillo J, Ding J (2010) Resource allocation to defence and growth are driven by different responses to generalist and specialist herbivory in an invasive plant. J Ecol 98:1157–1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01704.x

  18. Hull-Sanders HM, Johnson RH, Owen HA, Meyer GA (2009) Influence of polyploidy on insect herbivores of native and invasive genotypes of Solidago gigantea (Asteraceae). Plant signaling & behavior 4:893–895

  19. Joshi J, Vrieling K (2005) The enemy release and EICA hypothesis revisited: incorporating the fundamental difference between specialist and generalist herbivores. Ecol Lett 8:704–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00769.x

  20. Julien MH, Skarratt B, Maywald GF (1995) Potential geographical-distribution of alligator weed and its biological-control by Agasicles hygrophila. J Aquat Plant Manag 33:55–60

  21. Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  22. Keane RM, Crawley MJ (2002) Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol Evol 17:164–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02499-0

  23. Li HK, Wang R (1994) Biological control of alligator weed, Alternanthera philoxeroides, in central China by inoculative releases of Agasicles hygrophila [Col: Chrysomelidae] with artificial overwintering protection. Chin J Biol Control (In Chinese) 10:11–14

  24. Lin TT, Klinkhamer PGL, Vrieling K (2015) Parallel evolution in an invasive plant: effect of herbivores on competitive ability and regrowth of Jacobaea vulgaris. Ecol Lett 18:668–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12445

  25. Liu M, Zhou F, Pan XY, Zhang ZJ, Traw MB, Li B (2018) Specificity of herbivore-induced responses in an invasive species, Alternanthera philoxeroides (alligator weed). Ecol Evol 8:59–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3615

  26. Luginbill P (1928) The fall armyworm. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin of Botanical Research 34:1–91

  27. Müller-Schärer H, Schaffner U, Steinger T (2004) Evolution in invasive plants: implications for biological control. Trends Ecol Evol 19:417–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.05.010

  28. Maddox DM, Andres LA, Hennessey RD, Blackburn RD, Spencer NR (1971) Insects to control alligatorweed—invader of aquatic ecosystems in United-States. Bioscience 21:985–991. https://doi.org/10.2307/1296135

  29. Oduor AMO, Lankau RA, Strauss SY, Gomez JM (2011) Introduced Brassica nigra populations exhibit greater growth and herbivore resistance but less tolerance than native populations in the native range. New Phytol 191:536–544. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03685.x

  30. Pan XY, Geng YP, Sosa A, Zhang WJ, Li B, Chen JK (2007) Invasive Alternanthera philoxeroides: Biology, ecology and management. Acta Phytotaxon Sin 45:884–900. https://doi.org/10.1360/aps06134

  31. Pan XY, Jia X, Chen J-K, Li B (2012) For or against: the importance of variation in growth rate for testing the EICA hypothesis. Biol Invasions 14:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-011-9941-x

  32. Quintero C, Bowers MD (2013) Effects of insect herbivory on induced chemical defences and compensation during early plant development in Penstemon virgatus. Ann Bot 112:661–669. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mct011

  33. R Development Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/

  34. Rao GVR, Wightman JA, Rao DVR (1993) World review of the natural enemies and diseases of Spodoptera litura (f) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). Insect Science and Its Application 14:273–284

  35. Ridenour WM, Vivanco JM, Feng Y, Horiuchi J-i, Callaway RM (2008) No evidence for trade-offs: Centaurea plants from America are better competitors and defenders. Ecol Monogr 78:369–386. https://doi.org/10.1890/06-1926.1

  36. Saldamando CI, Marquez EJ (2012) Approach to Spodoptera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) phylogeny based on the sequence of the cytocrhome oxydase I (COI) mitochondrial gene. Rev Biol Trop 60:1237–1248

  37. Schwaegerle KE, McIintyre H, Swingley C (2000) Quantitative genetics and the persistence of environmental effects in clonally propagated organisms. Evolution 54:452–461

  38. Sosa A, Julien MH, Corda H (2004) New research on Alternanthera philoxeroides (alligator weed) in its South American native range. In: Cullen JM BD, Kriticos DJ, Lonsdale WM,Cullen JM, Briese DT, Kriticos DJ, Lonsdale WM (eds) Proceedings of the XI international symposium on biological control of weeds. CSIRO Entomology, Canberra

  39. Strauss SY, Agrawal AA (1999) The ecology and evolution of plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol Evol 14:179–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01576-6

  40. Strauss SY, Rudgers JA, Lau JA, Irwin RE (2002) Direct and ecological costs of resistance to herbivory. Trends Ecol Evol 17:278–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02483-7

  41. van Klinken RD, Edwards OR (2002) Is host-specificity of weed biological control agents likely to evolve rapidly following establishment? Ecol Lett 5:590–596. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1461-0248.2002.00343.x

  42. Wang GQ, Xu RS, Wang R (2011) Dynamic Relationships between structure and saponins accumulation in vegetative organs of Alternanthera philoxeroides Criseb. Bull Bot Res 31:686–691

  43. Wang Y, Siemann E, Wheeler GS, Zhu L, Gu X, Ding J (2012) Genetic variation in anti-herbivore chemical defences in an invasive plant. J Ecol 100:894–904. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2012.01980.x

  44. Willis AJ, Thomas MB, Lawton JH (1999) Is the increased vigour of invasive weeds explained by a trade-off between growth and herbivore resistance? Oecologia 120:632–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050899

  45. Zhang Z, Pan X, Blumenthal D, van Kleunen M, Liu M, Li B (2018) Contrasting effects of specialist and generalist herbivores on resistance evolution in invasive plants. Ecology 99:866–875. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2155

  46. Zuur A, Ieno E, Walker N, Saveliev A, Smith G (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New York

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC1200100) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41771053). We thank Dana Blumenthal (USDA-ARS Rangeland Resources Research Unit, Fort Collins, CO) for the critical reading of the manuscript and the valuable comments. We also thank Alejandro Sosa (The Foundation for the Study of Invasive Species, Spanish acronym: FuEDEI) for providing clones of the Argentinian plant genotypes. We are also grateful to Xiang Liu, Youzheng Zhang, and other members of IBSFU for their assistance in conducting the glasshouse experiment.

Author information

Correspondence to Xiaoyun Pan.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Communicated by J.J. Duan.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 1037 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, M., Pan, X., Zhang, Z. et al. Testing the shifting defense hypothesis for constitutive and induced resistance and tolerance. J Pest Sci 93, 355–364 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-019-01162-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Biological invasion
  • Biological control
  • Enemy release hypothesis
  • Phenotypic plasticity
  • Plant–herbivore interactions
  • Trade-offs