| Title |
Mini-Review: Constraints on Effectiveness of Cyanogenic Glycosides in Herbivore Defense
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Chemical Ecology, July 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1016298100201 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roslyn M. Gleadow, Ian E. Woodrow |
| Abstract |
Cyanogenesis is the process by which hydrogen cyanide is released from endogenous cyanide containing compounds. Many cyanogenic plants release HCN in sufficient quantities to be toxic and, as a result, tend to be avoided by herbivores. However, there are many exceptions with some herbivores either immune to the cyanogenic status of the plant, or in some cases attracted to cyanogenic plants. This has led to a certain degree of scepticism regarding the role of cyanogenic glycosides as defense compounds. In this review, we examine evidence showing that differences in the effectiveness of cyanogenic glycosides in deterring herbivory can usually be reconciled when the morphology, physiology, and behavior of the animals, together with the concentration of cyanogenic glycosides in the host plant, are taken into account. Cyanogenic glycosides are not effective against all herbivores, and not all cyanogenic plants release enough cyanide to be considered toxic. Nevertheless, they do form part of the broad spectrum of toxic and distasteful compounds that herbivores must accommodate if they are to feed on cyanogenic plants. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 4% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Mexico | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 210 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 71 | 31% |
| Researcher | 36 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 8% |
| Professor | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 36 | 16% |
| Unknown | 31 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 123 | 53% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 19 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 12 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 6% |
| Unknown | 38 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 August 2022.
All research outputs
#8,759,452
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Chemical Ecology
#719
of 2,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,507
of 49,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Chemical Ecology
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,229 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 49,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.