The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How Plants Obtain Predatory Mites as Bodyguards
Open accessAbstract
Phytophagous mites are a serious threat to their host plants; in absence of predators they tend to overexploit their food source. To prevent such a crash and maintain as much leaf area as possible host plants may defend themselves in various ways, one of which is to increase the effectiveness of natural enemies of the phytophagous mites. Predatory mites are considered to be very important natural enemies of plant-feeding mites and there is evidence for a mutualistic interaction with plants. Examples of how plants obtain and arrest predatory mites as bodyguards are discussed. It is known for a long time that some plant species provide pollen that appear to be a very profitable food source for some species of predatory mites: it does not only promote survival, but also allows development and egg production. In doing so, plants ensure themselves of bodyguards even before any damage is inflicted. Recently, evidence has been obtained that plants under attack by spider mites provide information by releasing a blend of volatile chemicals that are helpful to predatory mites in locating their prey. Plant-predator interactions are not always of a mutualistic nature. Some plant species invest in a rigorous defence against spider mites, even though this may be to the detriment of the predators: glandular hairs of some plant species entrap not only spider mites, but also their predators. The evolutionary implications of these various plant-predator interactions are discussed.
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
Cited by
A total system approach to sustainable pest management
Lewis, W. J., van Lenteren, J. C., Phatak, S. C., & Tumlinson, J. H. (1997) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.94.23.12243 · Cited by 622
Identification of Semiochemicals Released During Aphid Feeding That Attract Parasitoid Aphidius ervi
Du, Y., Poppy, G. M., Powell, W., Pickett, J. A., Wadhams, L. J., & Woodcock, C. M. (1998) · Journal of Chemical Ecology · doi:10.1023/a:1021278816970 · Cited by 451
Kant, M. R., Jonckheere, W., Knegt, B., Lemos, F., Liu, J., Schimmel, B. C. J., Villarroel, C. A., Ataide, L. M. S., Dermauw, W., Glas, J. J., et al. (2015) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcv054 · Cited by 360
Self-citationBehavioural and community ecology of plants that cry for help
DICKE, M. (2009) · Plant, Cell & Environment · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3040.2008.01913.x · Cited by 337
Self-citationPlant behaviour and communication
Karban, R. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01183.x · Cited by 294
Metadata
- Authors
- Dicke, M., & Sabelis, M. W.
- Venue
- Netherlands Journal of Zoology
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 1987
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 2-4
- Pages
- 148-165
- ISSN
- 0028-2960 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-542X
- OpenAlex
- W2135004380
- Cited by
- 573
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.98
- 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: How Plants Obtain Predatory Mites as Bodyguards. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/156854288x00111
- The paper
- Dicke, M., & Sabelis, M. W. (1987). How Plants Obtain Predatory Mites as Bodyguards. Netherlands Journal of Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1163/156854288x00111
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.