Cited by 144Insect-Plant Interactions and ControlAnimal Behavior and ReproductionEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Future directions in the ontogeny of plant defence: understanding the evolutionary causes and consequences

Barton, Kasey E., Boege, Karina·2017·Ecology Letters

Abstract

Plant defence often varies by orders of magnitude as plants develop from the seedling to juvenile to mature and senescent stages. Ontogenetic trajectories can involve switches among defence traits, leading to complex shifting phenotypes across plant lifetimes. While considerable research has characterised ontogenetic trajectories for now hundreds of plant species, we still lack a clear understanding of the molecular, ecological and evolutionary factors driving these patterns. In this study, we identify several non-mutually exclusive factors that may have led to the evolution of ontogenetic trajectories in plant defence, including developmental constraints, resource allocation costs, multi-functionality of defence traits, and herbivore selection pressure. Evidence from recent physiological studies is highlighted to shed light on the underlying molecular mechanisms involved in the regulation and activation of these developmental changes. Overall, our goal is to promote new research avenues that would provide evidence for the factors that have promoted the evolution of this complex lifetime phenotype. Future research focusing on the questions and approaches identified here will advance the field and shed light on why defence traits shift so dramatically across plant ontogeny, a widespread but poorly understood ecological pattern.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ele.12744

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A drop in secondary metabolite levels a few weeks after germination or at the onset of flowering may reflect an increased need of primary metabolites and nutrients rather than a drop in herbivore pressure.

    “A drop in secondary metabolite levels, as is often observed a few weeks after germination or at the onset of flowering, for instance (Meldau et al., 2012;Barton and Boege, 2017), may reflect an increased need of primary metabolites and nutrients rather than a drop in herbivore pressure.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barton, K. E., & Boege, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
  • Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
Corresponding author
Barton, Kasey E.
Venue
Ecology Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-02
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
403-411
ISSN
  • 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-0248
OpenAlex
W2584588850
Cited by
144
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 5
FWCI
16.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ecology Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (OISE‐1427127)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect-Plant Interactions and Control
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
plant defense, ontogeny, ontogenetic trajectories, developmental constraints, senescence
MeSH terms
Biological Evolution, Plants, Food Chain, Plant Development

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