Domestication impacts on plant–herbivore interactions: a meta-analysis

Whitehead, Susan R.; Turcotte, Martin M.; Poveda, Katja

doi:10.1098/rstb.2016.0034

Cited by 157 publications

(167 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

157

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Plant cultivars had different resistance to herbivory by M. sexta , but this did not depend on plant domestication nor soil type. This is in general agreement with our previous findings that M. sexta exhibits cultivar‐ or species‐specific resistance (Li et al, ), but is in contrast to other findings that show reduced herbivory resistance in domesticated crops (Chen, Gols, & Benrey, ; Rodriguez‐Saona et al, ; Whitehead, Turcotte, & Poveda, ). We found that the parasitoid C. congregata was primarily attracted to damaged versus undamaged plants, and for these damaged plants, wasps preferred some cultivars over others, and wild plants grown in tomato soil over wild plants grown in non‐tomato soil.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Domesticated tomatoes are more vulnerable to negative plant–soil feedbacks than their wild relatives

Carrillo

Ingwell

et al. 2019

Journal of Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domesticated plants can differ from their wild counterparts in the strength and outcome of species interactions, both above‐ and belowground. Plant–soil feedbacks influence plant success, and plant‐associated soil microbial communities can influence plant interactions with herbivores and their natural enemies, yet, it remains unclear if domestication has changed these relationships. To determine the effects of domestication on plant–soil interactions, we characterized soil microbial communities associated with various cultivars of domesticated tomato and some of its wild relatives. We measured the strength and direction of plant–soil feedbacks for domesticated and wild tomatoes, and the effects of soil on plant resistance to specialist herbivory by Manduca sexta, and the attraction of a parasitoid wasp, Cotesia congregata. Domesticated tomatoes and their wild relatives had negative plant–soil feedbacks, as conspecifics cultivated soil that negatively impacted performance of subsequent plants (longer germination time, lower biomass) than if they grew in non‐tomato soils. Significant variation existed among domesticated and wild tomato varieties in the strength of these feedbacks, ranging from neutral to strongly negative. For above‐ground plant biomass, tomato wild relatives were unaffected by growing in tomato‐conditioned soil, whereas domesticated tomatoes grew smaller in tomato soil, indicating effects of plant domestication. Overall, increased microbial biomass within the rhizosphere resulted in progressively less‐negative plant–soil feedbacks. Plant cultivars had different levels of resistance to herbivory by M. sexta, but this did not depend on plant domestication or soil type. The parasitoid C. congregata was primarily attracted to herbivore damaged plants, independent of plant domestication status, and for these damaged plants, wasps preferred some cultivars over others, and wild plants grown in tomato soil over wild plants grown in non‐tomato soil. Synthesis. These results indicate that crop tomatoes are more likely to show negative plant–soil feedbacks than wild progenitors, which could partially explain their sensitivity to monocultures in agricultural soils. Furthermore, cultivar‐specific variation in the ability to generate soil microbial biomass, independent of domestication status, appears to buffer the negative consequences of sharing the same soil. Last, soil legacies were relatively absent for herbivores, but not for parasitoid wasps, suggesting trophic level specificity in soil feedbacks on plant–insect interactions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Domesticated tomatoes are more vulnerable to negative plant–soil feedbacks than their wild relatives

Carrillo

Ingwell

et al. 2019

Journal of Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An understanding of these processes can help inform how to mitigate the impacts domestication/agriculture [31] empirical a comprehensive, phylogenetically controlled meta-analysis found that domestication influences the evolution of herbivore resistance, though the magnitude is highly variable. Furthermore, the evolution of plant defence traits was highly variable in direction and magnitude hunting/harvesting [32] review contrasting aquatic and terrestrial harvesting, the evolution of system-specific traits can negatively affect populations, but these effects can be mitigated through reduction of Then, from the standpoint of ecological and societal consequences, in §3 we ask: In which contexts will humaninduced evolution most alter .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human influences on evolution, and the ecological and societal consequences

Hendry

Gotanda

Svensson

2017

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

230

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One contribution of 18 to a theme issue 'Human influences on evolution, and the ecological and societal consequences'. Humans have dramatic, diverse and far-reaching influences on the evolution of other organisms. Numerous examples of this human-induced contemporary evolution have been reported in a number of 'contexts', including hunting, harvesting, fishing, agriculture, medicine, climate change, pollution, eutrophication, urbanization, habitat fragmentation, biological invasions and emerging/disappearing diseases. Although numerous papers, journal special issues and books have addressed each of these contexts individually, the time has come to consider them together and thereby seek important similarities and differences. The goal of this special issue, and this introductory paper, is to promote and expand this nascent integration. We first develop predictions as to which human contexts might cause the strongest and most consistent directional selection, the greatest changes in evolutionary potential, the greatest genetic (as opposed to plastic) changes and the greatest effects on evolutionary diversification. We then develop predictions as to the contexts where human-induced evolutionary changes might have the strongest effects on the population dynamics of the focal evolving species, the structure of their communities, the functions of their ecosystems and the benefits and costs for human societies. These qualitative predictions are intended as a rallying point for broader and more detailed future discussions of how human influences shape evolution, and how that evolution then influences species traits, biodiversity, ecosystems and humans.This article is part of the themed issue 'Human influences on evolution, and the ecological and societal consequences'.

show abstract

“…However, the increase in growth rate through domestication and agronomic selection assumed to be driving this reduction has not been found in several studies (Cook & Evans, ; Evans, ; Preece et al., ; Welter, ), suggesting that changes in defence investment through domestication may not result from a trade‐off with growth rate. Additionally, some studies have not found a defence reduction through domestication (Turcotte, Turley, & Johnson, ; Whitehead, Turcotte, & Poveda, ), suggesting that the phenomenon of plants being “disarmed by domestication” may not be as widespread as first thought.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Still armed after domestication? Impacts of domestication and agronomic selection on silicon defences in cereals

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. Plant phenotypes reflect trade-offs between competing resource-intensive physiological processes. A shift in resource allocation, away from anti-herbivore defences and towards growth and reproduction, is predicted through plant domestication, such that crops are faster growing and higher yielding than their wild ancestors. These changes are hypothesized to have come at the cost of defence investment, leaving crops “disarmed by domestication”. Silicon is the principal anti-herbivore defence in grasses, including many of our most important staple cereal crops, but the impact of domestication on silicon-based defences is unknown. We measured the effects of both domestication and modern agronomic selection on growth rate and a suite of anti-herbivore defences, specifically leaf toughness, silicon and phenolic concentrations. Our comparison of wild, landrace and modern cultivated cereals spanned multiple cereal species, including wheat, barley and maize, sampling eight independent domestication events and five examples of modern agronomic selection. Leaf silicon concentration showed a small, but significant, 10% reduction through domestication, but there was no effect of modern agronomic selection, and phenolic concentration was not affected by either factor. Silicon concentration correlated positively with leaf tensile strength, but negatively with foliar phenolic concentrations, suggesting a trade-off between chemical and physical defences. Size-standardized growth rate was independent of domestication status, and did not trade-off with silicon or phenolic defences. However, modelling showed that relative growth rate slowed more with increasing size in plants with higher silicon levels, so that they reached a smaller final size, implying a cost of silicon-based defence. We found the opposite pattern for phenolic-based defence, with increasing phenolic concentrations associated with a greater plant size at maturity, and faster maximum relative growth rates. Silicon-based defences have been reduced in cereals through domestication, consistent with our predicted costs of these defences to growth. However, modern agronomic selection has not influenced silicon defences in cereal crops and the small decrease in silicon concentration associated with domestication is unlikely to have a major effect on the ability of cereals to withstand a range of abiotic and biotic stresses. These findings have broad implications for crop protection and our understanding of plant trade-offs. \ud \ud A plain language summary is available for this article. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2435.12935/suppinfo)

show abstract

Domestication impacts on plant–herbivore interactions: a meta-analysis

Cited by 157 publications

References 45 publications

Domesticated tomatoes are more vulnerable to negative plant–soil feedbacks than their wild relatives

Domesticated tomatoes are more vulnerable to negative plant–soil feedbacks than their wild relatives

Human influences on evolution, and the ecological and societal consequences

Still armed after domestication? Impacts of domestication and agronomic selection on silicon defences in cereals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About