↓ Skip to main content

Interactions Between a Belowground Herbivore and Primary and Secondary Root Metabolites in Wild Cabbage

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Chemical Ecology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Interactions Between a Belowground Herbivore and Primary and Secondary Root Metabolites in Wild Cabbage
Published in
Journal of Chemical Ecology, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10886-015-0605-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Moniek Van Geem, Jeffrey A. Harvey, Anne Marie Cortesero, Ciska E. Raaijmakers, Rieta Gols

Abstract

Plants are attacked by both above- and belowground herbivores. Toxic secondary compounds are part of the chemical defense arsenal of plants against a range of antagonists, and are subject to genetic variation. Plants also produce primary metabolites (amino acids, nutrients, sugars) that function as essential compounds for growth and survival. Wild cabbage populations growing on the Dorset coast of the UK exhibit genetically different chemical defense profiles, even though they are located within a few kilometers of each other. As in other Brassicaceae, the defensive chemicals in wild cabbages constitute, among others, secondary metabolites called glucosinolates. Here, we used five Dorset populations of wild cabbage to study the effect of belowground herbivory by the cabbage root fly on primary and secondary chemistry, and whether differences in chemistry affected the performance of the belowground herbivore. There were significant differences in total root concentrations and chemical profiles of glucosinolates, amino acids, and sugars among the five wild cabbage populations. Glucosinolate concentrations not only differed among the populations, but also were affected by root fly herbivory. Amino acid and sugar concentrations also differed among the populations, but were not affected by root fly herbivory. Overall, population-related differences in plant chemistry were more pronounced for the glucosinolates than for amino acids and sugars. The performance of the root herbivore did not differ among the populations tested. Survival of the root fly was low (<40 %), suggesting that other belowground factors may override potential differences in effects related to primary and secondary chemistry.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Student > Master 6 17%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Environmental Science 3 8%
Chemistry 3 8%
Unknown 9 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,333,181
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Chemical Ecology
#1,883
of 2,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,707
of 264,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Chemical Ecology
#23
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 264,437 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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.