Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 124 of the 124 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Seduced by the dark side: integrating molecular and ecological perspectives on the influence of light on plant defence against pests and pathogens

Open access
Roberts, Michael R., Paul, Nigel D.·2006·New Phytologist

Abstract

Summary: Plants frequently suffer attack from herbivores and microbial pathogens, and have evolved a complex array of defence mechanisms to resist defoliation and disease. These include both preformed defences, ranging from structural features to stores of toxic secondary metabolites, and inducible defences, which are activated only after an attack is detected. It is well known that plant defences against pests and pathogens are commonly affected by environmental conditions, but the mechanisms by which responses to the biotic and abiotic environments interact are only poorly understood. In this review, we consider the impact of light on plant defence, in terms of both plant life histories and rapid scale molecular responses to biotic attack. We bring together evidence that illustrates that light not only modulates defence responses via its influence on biochemistry and plant development but, in some cases, is essential for the development of resistance. We suggest that the interaction between the light environment and plant defence is multifaceted, and extends across different temporal and biological scales. Contents Summary 677 I. Introduction 678 II. Light as an environmental variable 678 III. Long‐term effects of light on plant–herbivore or plant–pathogen interactions 679 IV. Mechanisms of responses to the light environment: the whole‐plant perspective 684 V. Short‐term responses to the light environment: induced defences 686 VI. Mechanisms for light‐dependent induced defences 688 VII. Interpreting interactions between light and defence responses 690 Acknowledgements 693 References 693

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 · 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01707.x

Cites

124 of 124 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 124 references

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
Roberts, M. R., & Paul, N. D.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-05-09
Volume
170
Issue
4
Pages
677-699
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2119958044
Cited by
332
References
124
FWCI
15.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Seduced by the dark side: integrating molecular and ecological perspectives on the influence of light on plant defence against pests and pathogens. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01707.x
The paper
Roberts, M. R., & Paul, N. D. (2006). Seduced by the dark side: integrating molecular and ecological perspectives on the influence of light on plant defence against pests and pathogens. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01707.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.