Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dlib.scu.ac.ir/handle/1807/90200
Title: Sources of controversy surrounding latitudinal patterns in herbivory and defence
subject: biogeography;chemical defence;herbivory rates;macroecology;species interactions
Publisher: Elsevier
Description: This is the accepted manuscript of an article published by Elsevier.
Both herbivory and plant defences against herbivores have been predicted to increase toward tropical regions. Early tests of this latitudinal herbivory-defence hypothesis (LHDH) were supportive, but accumulating evidence has been mixed. We argue that the lack of clarity might be due to heterogeneity in methodology and problems with study design and interpretation. Here we suggest possible solutions. Latitudinal studies need to carefully consider spatial and phylogenetic scale, to link plant defence measurements to herbivore performance, and to incorporate additional concepts from plant defence theory such as tolerance and induced defence. Additionally, we call for consistent measures of herbivory to standardize comparisons across biomes. Improving methodology in future studies of LHDH can resolve much of the current controversy.
This work was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Discovery Grant to PMK, an NSERC Vanier grant to DNA, and a Michigan State University Distinguished Fellowship to CAB.
URI: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/1807/90200
More Information: Anstett, D.N., Nunes, K.A., Baskett, C., Kotanen, P.M. (2016) Sources of controversy surrounding latitudinal patterns in herbivory and defense. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 789-802.
http://hdl.handle.net/1807/90200
10.1016/j.tree.2016.07.011
Appears in Collections:University of Toronto Mississauga

Files in This Item:
Click on the URI links for accessing contents.
Title: Sources of controversy surrounding latitudinal patterns in herbivory and defence
subject: biogeography;chemical defence;herbivory rates;macroecology;species interactions
Publisher: Elsevier
Description: This is the accepted manuscript of an article published by Elsevier.
Both herbivory and plant defences against herbivores have been predicted to increase toward tropical regions. Early tests of this latitudinal herbivory-defence hypothesis (LHDH) were supportive, but accumulating evidence has been mixed. We argue that the lack of clarity might be due to heterogeneity in methodology and problems with study design and interpretation. Here we suggest possible solutions. Latitudinal studies need to carefully consider spatial and phylogenetic scale, to link plant defence measurements to herbivore performance, and to incorporate additional concepts from plant defence theory such as tolerance and induced defence. Additionally, we call for consistent measures of herbivory to standardize comparisons across biomes. Improving methodology in future studies of LHDH can resolve much of the current controversy.
This work was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Discovery Grant to PMK, an NSERC Vanier grant to DNA, and a Michigan State University Distinguished Fellowship to CAB.
URI: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/1807/90200
More Information: Anstett, D.N., Nunes, K.A., Baskett, C., Kotanen, P.M. (2016) Sources of controversy surrounding latitudinal patterns in herbivory and defense. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 789-802.
http://hdl.handle.net/1807/90200
10.1016/j.tree.2016.07.011
Appears in Collections:University of Toronto Mississauga

Files in This Item:
Click on the URI links for accessing contents.
Title: Sources of controversy surrounding latitudinal patterns in herbivory and defence
subject: biogeography;chemical defence;herbivory rates;macroecology;species interactions
Publisher: Elsevier
Description: This is the accepted manuscript of an article published by Elsevier.
Both herbivory and plant defences against herbivores have been predicted to increase toward tropical regions. Early tests of this latitudinal herbivory-defence hypothesis (LHDH) were supportive, but accumulating evidence has been mixed. We argue that the lack of clarity might be due to heterogeneity in methodology and problems with study design and interpretation. Here we suggest possible solutions. Latitudinal studies need to carefully consider spatial and phylogenetic scale, to link plant defence measurements to herbivore performance, and to incorporate additional concepts from plant defence theory such as tolerance and induced defence. Additionally, we call for consistent measures of herbivory to standardize comparisons across biomes. Improving methodology in future studies of LHDH can resolve much of the current controversy.
This work was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Discovery Grant to PMK, an NSERC Vanier grant to DNA, and a Michigan State University Distinguished Fellowship to CAB.
URI: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/1807/90200
More Information: Anstett, D.N., Nunes, K.A., Baskett, C., Kotanen, P.M. (2016) Sources of controversy surrounding latitudinal patterns in herbivory and defense. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 789-802.
http://hdl.handle.net/1807/90200
10.1016/j.tree.2016.07.011
Appears in Collections:University of Toronto Mississauga

Files in This Item:
Click on the URI links for accessing contents.