Damage-Induced Resistance in Sagebrush: Volatiles Are Key to Intra- And Interplant Communication

Karban, Richard; Shiojiri, Kaori; Huntzinger, Mikaela; McCall, Andrew C.

doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[922:drisva]2.0.co;2

Cited by 294 publications

(345 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(72 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

322

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Airborne signaling in the context of plant antiherbivore defense has been repeatedly reported and is likely to be a common phenomenon, since herbivoreinduced VOCs serve multiple functions, such as the attraction of predatory arthropods (Turlings et al, 1995;De Moraes et al, 1998;Thaler, 1999;Kessler and Baldwin, 2001), the repellence of herbivores (Birkett et al, 2000;De Moraes et al, 2001), and the within-plant signaling that leads to systemic responses to local damage (Karban et al, 2006;Frost et al, 2007;Heil and Silva Bueno, 2007). In this study, we report that airborne plant-plant signaling can also prime plant resistance against a pathogenic bacterium.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…In particular, green-leaf volatiles and other herbivore-induced volatile organic compounds (VOCs) can mediate the systemic response of plants to local herbivore damage (Karban et al, 2006;Frost et al, 2007;Heil and Silva Bueno, 2007). Since such VOCs move freely in the air, they may also affect neighboring plants and then mediate the phenomenon of "plant-plant communication," which has been found in taxonomically unrelated plants such as Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), alder (Alnus glutinosa), corn (Zea mays), lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus), maple (Acer saccharum), sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), and wild tobacco (Nicotiana attenuata; Baldwin and Schultz, 1983;Rhoades, 1983;Tscharntke et al, 2001;Engelberth et al, 2004;Heil and Kost, 2006;Karban et al, 2006;Paschold et al, 2006;Heil and Silva Bueno, 2007;Ton et al, 2007;Godard et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Airborne Induction and Priming of Plant Defenses against a Bacterial Pathogen

Heil²,

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbivore-induced plant volatiles affect the systemic response of plants to local damage and hence represent potential plant hormones. These signals can also lead to "plant-plant communication," a defense induction in yet undamaged plants growing close to damaged neighbors. We observed this phenomenon in the context of disease resistance. Lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus) plants in a natural population became more resistant against a bacterial pathogen, Pseudomonas syringae pv syringae, when located close to conspecific neighbors in which systemic acquired resistance to pathogens had been chemically induced with benzothiadiazole (BTH). Airborne disease resistance induction could also be triggered biologically by infection with avirulent P. syringae. Challenge inoculation after exposure to induced and noninduced plants revealed that the air coming from induced plants mainly primed resistance, since expression of PATHOGENESIS-RELATED PROTEIN2 (PR-2) was significantly stronger in exposed than in nonexposed individuals when the plants were subsequently challenged by P. syringae. Among others, the plant-derived volatile nonanal was present in the headspace of BTH-treated plants and significantly enhanced PR-2 expression in the exposed plants, resulting in reduced symptom appearance. Negative effects on growth of BTH-treated plants, which usually occur as a consequence of the high costs of direct resistance induction, were not observed in volatile organic compound-exposed plants. Volatile-mediated priming appears to be a highly attractive means for the tailoring of systemic acquired resistance against plant pathogens.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Airborne Induction and Priming of Plant Defenses against a Bacterial Pathogen

Heil²,

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have suggested that plant behavior is simpler than that of animals. Now, however, plant biologists have discovered that experiential accumulation through conditioning can also significantly affect plant behavior [12,23,24]. Plants also have memory and communication behavior, even if they lack a central nervous system.…”

Section: Root System Coevolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Plant Root System Growth for Distributed Optimization: Models and Emergent Behaviors

Su¹,

Lin

Liu

et al. 2016

Open Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Life Sci. 2016; 11: 447-457 an optimal solution and the natural process of foraging for food [1,2]. These bio-inspired computing approaches are increasingly used by engineers and scientists to solve complex optimization problems that are intractable using conventional methods [3]. Generally, a bio-inspired optimization problem solving process occurs in the following manner: an initial position is randomized in the search space, and its acceptability assessed through the application of a fitness function; a bio-inspired position change strategy, consistent with the paradigm in use, is then iteratively applied with the hope of improving the solution acceptability; the final solution is identified either through achieving an acceptable level of fitness or on the completion of a set amount of computation.Successful examples of such bio-inspired computing algorithms as evolutionary algorithms [4] include genetic algorithm, evolutionary strategy, evolutionary programming, and genetic programming, ant colony systems [5], particle swarm optimization [6,7], and bee foraging algorithms [8].Although foraging behavior is a typically considered an animal characteristic, other organisms, including plants, have shown similar traits [9]. Because of plants' unique non-motile way of life, they only have access to resources nearby their growth site [10]. The above description is the main difference between plant growth and animal foraging. Obviously, the survival rules for each plant species is to efficiently find soil with sufficient nutrients and water. So, the ability of plant roots to sense they myriad factors in their local environment allows them to complete in the evolution process, and the growth direction and root system development are driven by these factors [11].Continuous changes of the natural environment are considered as the reason of plant root growth diversity, including increased lateral branching, root biomass, root length and uptake capacity. It should be noted that these developmental needs require correct auxin transport and signaling [12]. The number of roots and the length per unit mass of roots also changes in to response to heterogeneity [9]. Many studies have demonstrated that plant foraging is DOI 10.1515DOI 10. /biol-2016 Received May 14, 2016; accepted September 14, 2016 Abstract: Plant root foraging exhibits complex behaviors analogous to those of animals, including the adaptability to continuous changes in soil environments. In this work, we adapt the optimality principles in the study of plant root foraging behavior to create one possible bio-inspired optimization framework for solving complex engineering problems. This provides us with novel models of plant root foraging behavior and with new methods for global optimization. This framework is instantiated as a new search paradigm, which combines the root tip growth, branching, random walk, and death. We perform a comprehensive simulation to demonstrate that the proposed model accurately reflects the characteristics of natural plant roo...

show abstract

“…In inter-plant signaling, cues that are emitted from damaged individual plant are received by neighboring individual plant and induce resistance in the receiver plant. Sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) is known to use volatile cues to induce systemic resistance to herbivory within and between plants (socalled volatile communication) (Karban et al 2006). In the system of volatile communication of sagebrush, the area where the volatile communication occurred was within 60 cm from damaged individuals (Karban et al 2006) and the components of volatiles varied among individuals (Karban and Shiojiri 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) is known to use volatile cues to induce systemic resistance to herbivory within and between plants (socalled volatile communication) (Karban et al 2006). In the system of volatile communication of sagebrush, the area where the volatile communication occurred was within 60 cm from damaged individuals (Karban et al 2006) and the components of volatiles varied among individuals (Karban and Shiojiri 2009). Moreover, when sagebrush received volatiles from self branches or clonally potted genetically identical branches, it suffered less damage than when it received volatiles from genetically different potted branches (Karban and Shiojiri 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%