Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 457

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Mechanical Defences to Herbivory

Open access
Lucas, P·2000·Annals of Botany

Abstract

The two major mechanical defences of plants are toughness and hardness. These have different material causes and ecological functions. In any non-metal, high toughness is achieved by composite construction (i.e. by an organized mixture of components). The primary source of toughening in plants is the composite cell wall (cellulosic microfibrils set in a hemicellulose and, sometimes, lignin matrix), with a toughness of 3.45 kJ m −2 , which is ten-times the probable toughness of its individual components if they could be isolated. The toughness of most plant tissues is roughly proportional to the volume fraction of tissue occupied by cell wall ( Vc ) and, compared to animal tissues and non-biological composites, is very low. High toughness in plant cells is not produced by the walls themselves, but by their plastic intracellular collapse. This is a truly cellular toughening mechanism, one of the most potent ever discovered by materials scientists, depending on an elongate cell shape with microfibrils directed uniformly at a small angle to the cellular axis. Only ‘woody’ cells, tracheids and fibres, have this framework and only in the S2 layer of their secondary wall. Despite this non-optimum configuration, toughness is elevated by this mechanism ten-times above that due to cell wall resistance alone. The effectiveness of toughness in preventing herbivory is indisputable, but largely indirect due to confusion over a false equivalence between nutritional ‘fibre content’ and toughness. In contrast, generalized hardness requires high density. If hardness is due to high Vc , this conflicts with ‘woody’ toughness because there is then no lumen for cell walls to collapse into. Thus, dense seed shells may be brittle (i.e. low toughness) even if built from fibres. However, solid cell wall is not very hard. Instead, high hardness in plants is associated with amorphous silica and is always localized. The efficacy of hardness is more difficult to evaluate than toughness because some animals specialize in coping with it. Copyright 2000 Annals of Botany Company

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/anbo.2000.1261

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Metadata

Authors
Lucas, P.
Venue
Annals of Botany
Published
2000-11
Volume
86
Issue
5
Pages
913-920
ISSN
0305-7364 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165613829
Cited by
457
References
0
FWCI
37.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mechanical Defences to Herbivory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/anbo.2000.1261
The paper
Lucas, P. (2000). Mechanical Defences to Herbivory. Annals of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.2000.1261

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.