The evolution of plant response to herbivory: simultaneously considering resistance and tolerance in Brassica rapa

By D. Pilson. Evolutionary Ecology, 2000

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4e33c4654a92d49f5543f6b528c26144f2ac5496

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. E. Siemann
2. Martin Heil
3. Jianwen Zou
4. W. E. Rogers
5. Urs Schaffner
6. A. Agrawal
7. Jianqing Ding
8. G. Wheeler

In Insect Science

1. Martin Heil
2. A. Agrawal
3. Urs Schaffner
4. K. Decker
5. E. Siemann
6. E. Elle
7. M. Stastny
8. Andrea L. Graham

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. E. Siemann
2. Jianwen Zou
3. W. E. Rogers
4. Martin Heil
5. Urs Schaffner
6. Jianqing Ding
7. G. Wheeler
8. M. Stastny

Citations in the corpus

• Resource allocation to defence and growth are driven by different responses to generalist and specialist herbivory in an invasive plant (2010, background): “Plant defence involves fitness costs (Strauss & Agrawal 1999; Strauss et al. 2002) and the costs of tolerance and resistance may differ between populations (Pilson 2000; Fornoni et al. 2004).”
• Plastic defence expression in plants (2010, background): “Both allocation costs (Pilson 2000) and genetic costs (Simms and Triplett 1994) of tolerance have been reported and tolerance appears more important for less resistant genotypes than for highly resistant ones and vice versa.”
• Evolution of plant resistance and tolerance to frost damage (2004, background): “Thus, the theoretical prediction that selection should favour either resistance or tolerance to the same type of damage, but not both, has only received modest support in plant–herbivore studies (see also Pilson 2000).”
• Developmental variation in resistance and tolerance in a multi‐host–parasite system (2010, background): “…long highlighted the value of distinguishing between resistance and tolerance because of the diverse selection pressures they can impose on hosts and pathogens (Fineblum&Rausher 1995; Pilson 2000; Roy & Kirchner 2000; Tiffin & Inouye 2000; Rausher 2001; Kover & Schaal 2002; Restif & Koella 2004).”
• COMPENSATION FOR HERBIVORY IN WILD SUNFLOWER: RESPONSE TO SIMULATED DAMAGE BY THE HEAD‐CLIPPING WEEVIL (2002, methodology): “Despite the negative effects of natural Haplorhynchites damage on plant fitness found in other experiments (Pilson 2000a; E. Sundvall and D. Pilson, unpublished manuscript), in this experiment these processes allowed plants to fully compensate for damage.”
• Do vigour of introduced populations and escape from specialist herbivores contribute to invasiveness? (2005, methodology): “In 2001, measurements were taken to estimate vegetative size and feeding damage (so that we could assess resistance which equals 1 – damage, Pilson 2000).”
• Invasive ecotypes tolerate herbivory more effectively than native ecotypes of the Chinese tallow tree Sapium sebiferum (2004, background): “mechanisms that reduce the probability of consumption) (van der Meijden, Wijn & Verkaar 1988; Herms & Mattson 1992; Simms 1992; Fineblum & Rausher 1995; Mauricio 2000; Pilson 2000; Strauss et al. 2002).”
• Decomposing health: tolerance and resistance to parasites in animals (2009, methodology): “One solution is to scale the reaction norms for different host genotypes so that they have the same intercept (to avoid the general vigour problem), and then use the area under the curve as a measure of tolerance (where a larger area means higher tolerance; Pilson 2000).”
• Genetic variation in anti‐herbivore chemical defences in an invasive plant (2012, background): “relationships between their concentrations and herbivore attack (Strauss & Agrawal 1999; Pilson 2000; Strauss et al. 2002; Peñuelas et al. 2010).”