↓ Skip to main content

Plants eavesdrop on cues produced by snails and induce costly defenses that affect insect herbivores

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
19 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Plants eavesdrop on cues produced by snails and induce costly defenses that affect insect herbivores
Published in
Oecologia, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00442-018-4070-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

John L. Orrock, Brian M. Connolly, Won-Gyu Choi, Peter W. Guiden, Sarah J. Swanson, Simon Gilroy

Abstract

Although induced defenses are widespread in plants, the degree to which plants respond to herbivore kairomones (incidental chemicals that herbivores produce independent of herbivory), the costs and benefits of responding to cues of herbivory risk, and the ecological consequences of induced defenses remain unclear. We demonstrate that undamaged tomatoes, Solanum lycopersicum, induce defenses in response to a kairomone (locomotion mucus) of snail herbivores (Helix aspersa). Induced defense had significant costs and benefits for plants: plants exposed to snail mucus or a standard defense elicitor (methyl jasmonate, MeJA) exhibited slower growth, but also experienced less herbivory by an insect herbivore (Spodoptera exigua). We also find that kairomones from molluscan herbivores lead to deleterious effects on insect herbivores mediated through changes in plant defense, i.e., mucus-induced defenses of Solanum lycopersicum-reduced growth of S. exigua. These results suggest that incidental cues of widespread generalist herbivores might be a mechanism creating variation in plant growth, plant defense, and biotic interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Student > Master 10 16%
Researcher 9 14%
Other 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 51%
Environmental Science 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 17 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,610,984
of 25,523,622 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#176
of 4,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,076
of 452,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#8
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,523,622 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,515 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.