Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 291

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Herbivore induction of the glucosinolate–myrosinase defense system: major trends, biochemical bases and ecological significance

Open access
Textor, Susanne, Gershenzon, Jonathan·2009·Phytochemistry Reviews

Abstract

Like many other plant defense compounds, glucosinolates are present constitutively in plant tissues, but are also induced to higher levels by herbivore attack. Of the major glucosinolate types, indolic glucosinolates are most frequently induced regardless of the type of herbivore involved. Over 90% of previous studies found that herbivore damage to glucosinolate-containing plants led to an increased accumulation of indolic glucosinolates at levels ranging up to 20-fold. Aliphatic and aromatic glucosinolates are also commonly induced by herbivores, though usually at much lower magnitudes than indolic glucosinolates, and aliphatic and aromatic glucosinolates may even undergo declines following herbivory. The glucosinolate defense system also requires another partner, the enzyme myrosinase, to hydrolyze the parent glucosinolates into biologically active derivatives. Much less is known about myrosinase induction after herbivory compared to glucosinolate induction, and no general trends are evident. However, it is clear that insect feeding stimulates the formation of various myrosinase associated proteins whose function is not yet understood. The biochemical mechanism of glucosinolate induction involves a jasmonate signaling cascade that leads eventually to increases in the transcript levels of glucosinolate biosynthetic genes. Several recently described transcription factors controlling glucosinolate biosynthesis are activated by herbivory or wounding. Herbivore induction of glucosinolates has sometimes been demonstrated to increase protection against subsequent herbivore attack, but more research is needed to evaluate the costs and benefits of this phenomenon.

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 · 10.1007/s11101-008-9117-1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 291

Metadata

Authors
Textor, S., & Gershenzon, J.
Venue
Phytochemistry Reviews
Published
2008-11-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
149-170
ISSN
  • 1568-7767 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-980X
OpenAlex
W2142767735
Cited by
291
References
1
FWCI
11.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Herbivore induction of the glucosinolate–myrosinase defense system: major trends, biochemical bases and ecological significance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11101-008-9117-1
The paper
Textor, S., & Gershenzon, J. (2009). Herbivore induction of the glucosinolate–myrosinase defense system: major trends, biochemical bases and ecological significance. Phytochemistry Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-008-9117-1

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.