Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2018
License: CC 0
Data sources: ZENODO
DRYAD
Dataset . 2018
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

Data from: Root and shoot glucosinolate allocation patterns follow optimal defence allocation theory

Authors: Tsunoda, Tomonori; Krosse, Sebastian; van Dam, Nicole; van Dam, Nicole M.;

Data from: Root and shoot glucosinolate allocation patterns follow optimal defence allocation theory

Abstract

1. Optimal defence allocation theory (ODT) is one of the most prominent theoretical frameworks to explain the allocation of defence compounds within plants. It predicts that the most valuable and vulnerable plant organs have the highest levels of chemical defence. The ODT has been well worked out and experimentally tested for shoot defences, but not for root defences. To assess if ODT principles apply similarly to roots and shoots, we examined glucosinolates in aboveground and belowground organs of nine plant species belonging to two families. 2. In order to evaluate whether ODT equally applies to shoot and root organs, we designed a conceptual model in which aboveground and belowground organs were assigned to orders of importance to plant performance. We hypothesized that organs constituting the plant’s core structure are better protected than more distal organs. 3. The nine plant species were cultivated, and their roots and shoots were harvested and divided in three orders for glucosinolate analysis. Using a specialist (Delia radicum) and a generalist (Amphimallon solstitiale) root herbivore, we also experimentally tested the hypothesis that the generalist herbivore prefers to feed on fine roots with a low glucosinolate concentration, while the specialist prefers taproots with a high glucosinolate concentration. 4. We found that both in roots and shoots the higher-ordered core structural organs (taproots and stems) had the highest levels of glucosinolates. Belowground, taproots and lateral roots were better protected than the more distal, and less costly, fine roots in seven out of nine species tested. The specialist root herbivore preferred feeding on the highly defended taproots, which is in line with what has been found for aboveground specialist herbivores. Moreover, the glucosinolate concentration in roots overall was significantly higher than that in shoots. 5. Synthesis. These results support the hypothesis that ODT generally applies to glucosinolate allocation in aboveground and belowground organs and may mainly serve to maintain the integrity of the main plant structure. Moreover, it suggests that aboveground and belowground insect herbivores independently exert similar selection pressures on defence allocation patterns in roots and shoots.

Glucosinolate and insect feeding preference dataData.xlsx

Country
Netherlands
Keywords

Amphimallon solstitiale, Tropaeolum majus, Brassicaceae, 2-phenylethylglucosinolate, Constitutive defence, Plant–soil (below-ground) interactions; Plant–insect interactions; Tropaeolum majus; 2-phenylethylglucosinolate; Amphimallon solstitiale; Constitutive defence; Delia radicum; Brassicaceae, Delia radicum, Plant–insect interactions

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 7
    download downloads 1
  • 7
    views
    1
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
7
1