Beyond the compensatory continuum: environmental resource levels and plant tolerance of herbivory

By Michael J. Wise, W. Abrahamson. 2005

257 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Disentangling the drivers of context‐dependent plant–animal interactions (2014, background): “Although monocots generally are able to better compensate for herbivore damage in high- versus low-resource environments, the same has not been found for dicots (Hawkes & Sullivan 2001), which has led to modifications of the Compensatory Continuum model (Wise & Abrahamson 2005).”
Variation in tolerance to herbivory is mediated by differences in biomass allocation in aspen (2007, methodology): “Throughout the experiment, trees were watered as needed.”
Positive effects of shrubs on plant species diversity do not change along a gradient in grazing pressure in an arid shrubland (2012, unknown): “Tel.”
Grazing‐induced shifts in community functional composition and soil nutrient availability in Tibetan alpine meadows (2016, background): “…have evolved foliar traits along the leaf economic spectrum (LES) that mediate inherent trade-offs between growth and competitive abilities (Shipley et al. 2006; Donovan et al. 2011), which in turn are conditional on resource availability and the risk of herbivory (Wise & Abrahamson 2005, 2007).”
Resistance and tolerance in Populus tremuloides: genetic variation, costs, and environmental dependency (2007, methodology): “This prediction, however, has not been widely supported by data (Hawkes and Sullivan 2001; Wise and Abrahamson 2005 ).”