Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Inducible Defenses (inducible + defense)
Selected AbstractsDefense mechanisms against grazing: a study of trypsin inhibitor responses to simulated grazing in the sedge Carex bigelowiiOIKOS, Issue 9 2007Åsa Lindgren Trypsin inhibitors have been suggested to constitute an inducible defense in the sedge Carex bigelowii, and some former studies suggest that this might be a cause for the cyclic population dynamics in many alpine and arctic small mammals, for example lemmings (Lemmus lemmus). We investigated this further by using a method of simulated grazing (clipping) at different intensities, in three different habitats with varying resource availability, with different harvest times (hours after clipping), and two different stages of ramets (reproductive/vegetative) in a study from the Swedish mountain range. Our results do not indicate that C. bigelowii has an inducible defense constituted by an increase in trypsin inhibitor activity (TIA), but rather that the amount of soluble plant proteins (SPP) is lowered in wounded plants. The responses were somewhat different in the three habitats, with ramets growing in the marsh showing the highest ratio of TIA to SPP, due to low amounts of SPP. We did not find any significant effects of harvest time, or of the stage of the ramet that could support the hypothesis of an inducible defense. To conclude, we could not find any evidence for an inducible defense consisting of trypsin inhibitors in Carex bigelowii ramets, but we did find variations in the amount of SPP that may have nutritional consequences for herbivores. [source] The heritability of inducible defenses in tadpolesJOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY, Issue 4 2005R. A. RELYEA Abstract The evolution of plastic traits requires phenotypic trade-offs and heritable traits, yet the latter requirement has received little attention, especially for predator-induced traits. Using a half-sib design, I examined the narrow-sense heritability of predator-induced behaviour, morphology, and life history in larval wood frogs (Rana sylvatica). Many of the traits had significant additive genetic variation in predator (caged Anax longipes) and no-predator environments. Whereas most traits had moderate to high heritability across environments, tail depth exhibited high heritability with predators but low heritability without predators. In addition, several traits had significant heritability for plasticity, suggesting a potential for selection to act on plasticity per se. Genetic correlations confirmed known phenotypic relationships across environments and identified novel relationships within each environment. This appears to be the first investigation of narrow-sense heritabilities for predator-induced traits and confirms that inducible traits previously shown to be under selection also have a genetic basis and should be capable of exhibiting evolutionary responses. [source] Symbiont-mediated changes in Lolium arundinaceum inducible defenses: evidence from changes in gene expression and leaf compositionNEW PHYTOLOGIST, Issue 3 2007Terrence J. Sullivan Summary ,,Plants have multiple strategies to deal with herbivory, ranging from chemical or physical defenses to tolerating damage and allocating resources for regrowth. Grasses usually tolerate herbivory, but for some cool-season grasses, their strategy may depend upon their interactions with intracellular symbionts. Neotyphodium endophytes are common symbionts in pooid grasses, and, for some host species, they provide chemical defenses against both vertebrate and invertebrate herbivores. ,,Here, it was tested whether defenses provided by Neotyphodium coenophialum in Lolium arundinaceum (tall fescue) are inducible by both mechanical damage and herbivory from an invertebrate herbivore, Spodoptera frugiperda (fall armyworm), via a bioassay and by quantifying mRNA expression for lolC, a gene required for loline biosysnthesis. ,,Both mechanical and herbivore damage had a negative effect on the reproduction of a subsequent herbivore, Rhopalosiphum padi (bird cherry-oat aphid), and herbivore damage caused an up-regulation of lolC. Uninfected grass hosts also had significantly higher foliar N% and lower C : N ratio compared with infected hosts, suggesting greater allocation to growth rather than defense. ,,For L. arundinaceum, N. coenophialum appears to switch its host's defensive strategy from tolerance via compensation to resistance. [source] Poor phenotypic integration of blue mussel inducible defenses in environments with multiple predatorsOIKOS, Issue 5 2009Aaren S. Freeman Aquatic prey encounter an array of threat cues from multiple predators and killed conspecifics, yet the vast majority of induced defenses are investigated using cues from single predator species. In most cases, it is unclear if odors from multiple predators will disrupt defenses observed in single-predator induction experiments. We experimentally compared the inducible defenses of the common marine mussel Mytilus edulis to waterborne odor from pairwise combinations of three predators representing two attack strategies. Predators included the sea star, Asterias vulgaris (=Asteriasrubens), and the crabs Carcinus maenas and Cancer irroratus. The mussels increased adductor muscle mass in response to cues from unfed Asterias (a predatory seastar that pulls mussel shells open) and increased shell thickness in response to unfed Carcinus, a predatory crab that crushes or peels shells. However, the mussels did not express either predator specific response when exposed to the combined cues of Asterias and Carcinus, and mussels did not increase shell thickness when exposed to cues from Cancer alone or any pairwise combination of the three predators. Shell closure or ,clamming up' did not occur in response to any predator combination. These results suggest that predator-specific responses to the Asterias and Carcinus are poorly integrated and cannot be expressed simultaneously. Simultaneous cues from multiple predators affect the integration of predator specific defenses and predator odors from functionally similar predators do not necessarily initiate similar defenses. Ultimately, the degree that prey can integrate potentially disparate defenses in a multiple predator environment may have ecological ramifications and represent a seldom explored facet of the evolution of inducible defenses. [source] | ||||||||||