Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 302

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reduced growth and seed set following chemical induction of pathogen defence: does systemic acquired resistance (SAR) incur allocation costs?

Open access
Heil, Martin, Hilpert, Andrea, Kaiser, Werner, Linsenmair, K. Eduard·2000·Journal of Ecology
DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00479.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Summary: 1 Although most theories on plant defence assume that costs will result from the production and maintenance of defensive traits, studies on the costs of induced defence against pathogens are comparatively rare. 2 We focus on fitness costs resulting from the chemical induction of systemic acquired resistance (SAR), a rather unspecific form of defence, which can be induced by and is effective against a broad spectrum of bacteria, fungi and viruses. 3 We used a model system in which we treated wheat plants that were protected against fungi by ‘traditional’ fungicides with BION® (a benzothiadiazole which induces pathogen resistance). Treated plants were therefore compelled to invest in defence without gaining any profit from the induction. 4 Treated plants achieved lower biomass than untreated controls, and developed fewer shoots and ears and therefore produced fewer seeds. The effects were most pronounced in plants that suffered from a shortage of nitrogen, and were observed only when pathogen resistance was induced during lateral shoot production. Later treatment revealed no significant effects. 5 We discuss whether the differences between treated and control plants can be interpreted as a consequence of allocation costs. Such costs could result from metabolic competition between processes involved in plant growth and the synthesis of defence‐related compounds.

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00479.x

Cites

33 of 33 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 33 references

Cited by

See all 302

Metadata

Authors
Heil, M., Hilpert, A., Kaiser, W., & Linsenmair, K. E.
Venue
Journal of Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-08
Volume
88
Issue
4
Pages
645-654
ISSN
  • 0022-0477 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2745
DOI
10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00479.x
OpenAlex
W1980272617
Cited by
302
References
33
FWCI
15.25
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: Reduced growth and seed set following chemical induction of pathogen defence: does systemic acquired resistance (SAR) incur allocation costs? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00479.x
The paper
Heil, M., Hilpert, A., Kaiser, W., & Linsenmair, K. E. (2000). Reduced growth and seed set following chemical induction of pathogen defence: does systemic acquired resistance (SAR) incur allocation costs? Journal of Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00479.x

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.