昆虫食草量的空间变化是否与植物质量的变化相匹配?一项荟萃分析。

IF 7.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecology Letters Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1111/ele.14440
Elena L. Zvereva, Bastien Castagneyrol, Mikhail V. Kozlov
{"title":"昆虫食草量的空间变化是否与植物质量的变化相匹配?一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Elena L. Zvereva,&nbsp;Bastien Castagneyrol,&nbsp;Mikhail V. Kozlov","doi":"10.1111/ele.14440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Variation in herbivore pressure has often been predicted from patterns in plant traits considered as antiherbivore defences. Here, we tested whether spatial variation in field insect herbivory is associated with the variation in plant quality by conducting a meta-analysis of 223 correlation coefficients between herbivory levels and the expression of selected plant traits. We found no overall correlation between herbivory and either concentrations of plant secondary metabolites or values of physical leaf traits. This result was due to both the large number of low correlations and the opposing directions of high correlations in individual studies. Field herbivory demonstrated a significant association only with nitrogen: herbivore pressure increased with an increase in nitrogen concentration in plant tissues. Thus, our meta-analysis does not support either theoretical prediction, i.e., that plants possess high antiherbivore defences in localities with high herbivore pressure or that herbivory is low in localities where plant defences are high. We conclude that information about putative plant defences is insufficient to predict plant losses to insects in field conditions and that the only bottom-up factor shaping spatial variation in insect herbivory is plant nutritive value. Our findings stress the need to improve a theory linking plant putative defences and herbivory.</p>","PeriodicalId":161,"journal":{"name":"Ecology Letters","volume":"27 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ele.14440","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does spatial variation in insect herbivory match variations in plant quality? A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Elena L. Zvereva,&nbsp;Bastien Castagneyrol,&nbsp;Mikhail V. Kozlov\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ele.14440\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Variation in herbivore pressure has often been predicted from patterns in plant traits considered as antiherbivore defences. Here, we tested whether spatial variation in field insect herbivory is associated with the variation in plant quality by conducting a meta-analysis of 223 correlation coefficients between herbivory levels and the expression of selected plant traits. We found no overall correlation between herbivory and either concentrations of plant secondary metabolites or values of physical leaf traits. This result was due to both the large number of low correlations and the opposing directions of high correlations in individual studies. Field herbivory demonstrated a significant association only with nitrogen: herbivore pressure increased with an increase in nitrogen concentration in plant tissues. Thus, our meta-analysis does not support either theoretical prediction, i.e., that plants possess high antiherbivore defences in localities with high herbivore pressure or that herbivory is low in localities where plant defences are high. We conclude that information about putative plant defences is insufficient to predict plant losses to insects in field conditions and that the only bottom-up factor shaping spatial variation in insect herbivory is plant nutritive value. Our findings stress the need to improve a theory linking plant putative defences and herbivory.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecology Letters\",\"volume\":\"27 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ele.14440\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecology Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.14440\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology Letters","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.14440","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

食草动物压力的变化通常是根据被认为具有抗食草动物防御能力的植物性状的模式来预测的。在这里,我们通过对草食性水平与所选植物性状表达之间的 223 个相关系数进行元分析,检验了田间昆虫草食性的空间变化是否与植物质量的变化有关。我们发现,食草量与植物次生代谢物浓度或叶片物理性状值之间总体上没有相关性。造成这一结果的原因是,个别研究中存在大量低相关性和高相关性的相反方向。田间食草动物仅与氮有显著相关性:食草动物的压力随着植物组织中氮浓度的增加而增加。因此,我们的荟萃分析并不支持任何一种理论预测,即在食草动物压力高的地方,植物具有较高的抗食草动物防御能力,或者在植物防御能力高的地方,食草动物较少。我们的结论是,有关假定的植物防御能力的信息不足以预测田间条件下昆虫对植物造成的损失,影响昆虫草食性空间变化的唯一自下而上的因素是植物的营养价值。我们的研究结果表明,有必要改进将植物假定防御和草食性联系起来的理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Does spatial variation in insect herbivory match variations in plant quality? A meta-analysis

Variation in herbivore pressure has often been predicted from patterns in plant traits considered as antiherbivore defences. Here, we tested whether spatial variation in field insect herbivory is associated with the variation in plant quality by conducting a meta-analysis of 223 correlation coefficients between herbivory levels and the expression of selected plant traits. We found no overall correlation between herbivory and either concentrations of plant secondary metabolites or values of physical leaf traits. This result was due to both the large number of low correlations and the opposing directions of high correlations in individual studies. Field herbivory demonstrated a significant association only with nitrogen: herbivore pressure increased with an increase in nitrogen concentration in plant tissues. Thus, our meta-analysis does not support either theoretical prediction, i.e., that plants possess high antiherbivore defences in localities with high herbivore pressure or that herbivory is low in localities where plant defences are high. We conclude that information about putative plant defences is insufficient to predict plant losses to insects in field conditions and that the only bottom-up factor shaping spatial variation in insect herbivory is plant nutritive value. Our findings stress the need to improve a theory linking plant putative defences and herbivory.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecology Letters
Ecology Letters 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
3.40%
发文量
201
审稿时长
1.8 months
期刊介绍: Ecology Letters serves as a platform for the rapid publication of innovative research in ecology. It considers manuscripts across all taxa, biomes, and geographic regions, prioritizing papers that investigate clearly stated hypotheses. The journal publishes concise papers of high originality and general interest, contributing to new developments in ecology. Purely descriptive papers and those that only confirm or extend previous results are discouraged.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Microbial Interactions on Ecosystem Function Intensifies Under Stress Mycorrhizal Types Regulate Tree Spatial Associations in Temperate Forests: Ectomycorrhizal Trees Might Favour Species Coexistence Acclimation Unifies the Scaling of Carbon Assimilation Across Climate Gradients and Levels of Organisation Seasonally Changing Interactions of Species Traits of Termites and Trees Promote Complementarity in Coarse Wood Decomposition Seasonality Structures Avian Functional Diversity and Niche Packing Across North America
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1