The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Manipulative Approaches to Testing Adaptive Plasticity: Phytochrome‐Mediated Shade‐Avoidance Responses in Plants
Abstract
Phenotypic plasticity is often assumed to be adaptive, but this hypothesis has rarely been tested. To support the hypothesis, it is necessary to demonstrate that the phenotype induced in each relevant environment confers high fitness in that environment, relative to alternative phenotypes. Unfortunately, such tests are difficult to perform because plasticity prevents the expression of "inappropriate" phenotypes within each environment. Genetic and physiological manipulation can be used very effectively to extend the range of phenotypes within environments and thus provide powerful tools for testing the adaptive plasticity hypothesis. The expression of specific genes involved in cue perception or signal transduction can be altered by mutation or the introduction of transgenes, thus altering the plastic response of an organism to environmental cues. It is also possible to alter the cue itself or to manipulate the developmental response physiologically so as to obtain alternative phenotypes. The relative fitness of these alternative phenotypes can then be measured in each relevant environment. However, these techniques will be most useful when combined with techniques such as phenotypic selection analysis to identify the specific traits under selection in natural populations. We illustrate these approaches using phytochrome-mediated "shade avoidance" responses in plants as a model system. We review the genetic and physiological mechanisms underlying these responses, illustrate how genetic manipulation can elucidate their adaptive value, and discuss the use of physiological manipulation to measure natural selection on plasticity in the wild.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
The measurement of selection on correlated characters
Lande, R., & Arnold, S. J. (1983) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1983.tb00236.x · Cited by 5,437
Cited by
Poorter, H., Niklas, K. J., Reich, P. B., Oleksyn, J., Poot, P., & Mommer, L. (2012) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03952.x · Cited by 3,163
Phenotypic Plasticity in the Interactions and Evolution of Species
Agrawal, A. A. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1060701 · Cited by 1,630
Jack of all trades, master of some? On the role of phenotypic plasticity in plant invasions
Richards, C. L., Bossdorf, O., Muth, N. Z., Gurevitch, J., & Pigliucci, M. (2006) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00950.x · Cited by 1,456
Self-citationPhytochromes and light signal perception by plants—an emerging synthesis
Smith, H. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35036500 · Cited by 1,380
The shade‐avoidance syndrome: multiple signals and ecological consequences
Ballaré, C. L., & Pierik, R. (2017) · Plant, Cell & Environment · doi:10.1111/pce.12914 · Cited by 542
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmitt, J., Dudley, S. A., & Pigliucci, M.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1999-07
- Volume
- 154
- Issue
- S1
- Pages
- S43-S54
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2178439399
- Cited by
- 250
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Manipulative Approaches to Testing Adaptive Plasticity: Phytochrome‐Mediated Shade‐Avoidance Responses in Plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/303282
- The paper
- Schmitt, J., Dudley, S. A., & Pigliucci, M. (1999). Manipulative Approaches to Testing Adaptive Plasticity: Phytochrome‐Mediated Shade‐Avoidance Responses in Plants. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/303282
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.