Chemical Detection of Natural Enemies by Arthropods: An Ecological Perspective

By M. Dicke, Paul Grostal. 2001

300 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics, Insect Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f0fa37f1433ae582623c799885dcb4e9cd56bb4f

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. Shira D. Gordon
2. Pedro Barbosa
3. G. Uetz
4. I. Castellanos
5. E. Hebets
6. Jeremy S. Gibson
7. Dustin J. Wilgers
8. J. Roberts

In Genetics

1. Shira D. Gordon
2. J. Pell
3. G. Uetz
4. N. V. Meyling
5. E. Hebets
6. Jeremy S. Gibson
7. Dustin J. Wilgers
8. J. Roberts

In Insect Science

1. J. Pell
2. N. V. Meyling
3. S. Jaronski
4. J. Eilenberg

Citations in the corpus

• Detection and avoidance of an entomopathogenic fungus by a generalist insect predator (2006, background): “Adaptations to detect enemy-specific compounds would be a selective advantage for any species enabling it to assess the risk of attack and react accordingly (Dicke & Grostal, 2001).”
• Phenotypic modifications to conspecific density arising from predation risk assessment (2003, unknown): “Although ecologists do not typically evaluate predator cues in terms of whether they originate from direct detection or indirect cues of predator presence, there is much evidence that indirect cues are used in part or in whole by many species (Dicke and Grostal 2001).”
• Chemical ecology of predator–prey interactions in aquatic ecosystems: a review and prospectusThe present review is one in the special series of reviews on animal–plant interactions. (2010, unknown): “A recent review by Dicke and Grostal (2001) categorized pheromones as any of +/–, –/+, or +/+.”
• Antipredator responses of wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae) to sensory cues representing an avian predator (2009, background): “Additionally, a few studies have examined antipredator behaviour in terrestrial invertebrates, including insects and spiders (Riechert & Hedrick 1990; Kotiaho et al. 1998; Dicke & Grostal 2001; Persons & Rypstra 2001; Persons et al. 2001, 2002; Hieber et al. 2002; Taylor et al. 2005).”
• Evaluation of predation risk by a caterpillar using substrate-borne vibrations (2006, background): “Only recently have studies begun to examine in detail the signals that mediate predatore prey communication and, in particular, the characteristics of the signal that provide information useful in predation risk assessment (Dicke & Grostal 2001; Djemai et al. 2001).”