Abstract
Abstract Induced defence allows plants to manage energy reserves more efficiently by synthesizing defence compounds only when needed. A risk of induced defence is that when plants are challenged by herbivores, they may suffer considerable damage before the defence is mounted. Priming can cause a state of readiness for the induction of the defence response, leading to a reduction in the damage received in an energy‐efficient and less costly manner. Our objective was to verify whether seed coating with jasmonic acid ( JA ) and chitosan ( CH ) could prime plants against chewing and sap‐feeding herbivores by affecting their herbivory of treated plants. We used B rassica oleracea L. var. capitata cv. Derby Day ( B rassicaceae) seeds treated with JA and CH , second‐instar P lutella xylostella L. ( L epidoptera: P lutellidae), and newborn nymphs of M yzus persicae ( S ulzer) ( H emiptera: A phididae). We evaluated life‐history, performance, and fecundity traits of the insects. Neither JA nor CH affected B . oleracea leaf area. Both JA and CH affected P . xylostella . JA reduced the mean relative growth rate of P . xylostella and led to 84% pre‐imaginal mortality, whereas CH reduced oviposition. JA reduced significantly the intrinsic rate of increase in M . persicae , whereas CH did not differ from the control. Therefore, JA and CH seed coating lead to long‐term defence priming in B . oleracea against chewing and sap‐feeding insects.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
JA did not affect cabbage leaf area.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“Neither JA nor CH affected B . oleracea leaf area.”
Claim · model-written summary
CH did not affect cabbage leaf area.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“Neither JA nor CH affected B . oleracea leaf area.”
Claim · model-written summary
JA lowered P. xylostella relative growth rate.
- Taxon
- cabbage
Brassica oleracea var. capitatat0 - Treatment
- JAe0
- Interactor
- P . xylostellae0pest
- Outcome
- mean relative growth rate of P . xylostellae0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“JA reduced the mean relative growth rate of P . xylostella”
t0“cabbage”
t1“cabbage”
Claim · model-written summary
JA led to 84% pre-imaginal P. xylostella mortality.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatat0
- Treatment
- JAe0
- Interactor
- P . xylostellae0pest
- Outcome
- pre‐imaginal mortalitye0
- Value
- 84%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“JA reduced the mean relative growth rate of P . xylostella and led to 84% pre‐imaginal mortality”
t0“cabbage”
t1“cabbage”
Claim · model-written summary
CH reduced P. xylostella oviposition.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatat0
- Treatment
- CHe0
- Interactor
- P . xylostellae1pest
- Outcome
- ovipositione0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whereas CH reduced oviposition.”
t0“cabbage”
t1“cabbage”
e1“Both JA and CH affected P . xylostella .”
Claim · model-written summary
JA significantly reduced M. persicae intrinsic rate of increase.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatat0
- Treatment
- JAe0
- Interactor
- M . persicaee0pest
- Outcome
- intrinsic rate of increase in M . persicaee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“JA reduced significantly the intrinsic rate of increase in M . persicae”
t0“cabbage”
t1“cabbage”
Claim · model-written summary
CH did not differ from control for the M. persicae intrinsic rate of increase.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatat0
- Treatment
- CHe0
- Interactor
- M . persicaee1pest
- Outcome
- intrinsic rate of increase in M . persicaee1
- Comparator
- controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whereas CH did not differ from the control.”
t0“cabbage”
t1“cabbage”
e1“JA reduced significantly the intrinsic rate of increase in M . persicae”
The same questions in other papers
chitosan · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →jasmonic acid · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
jasmonic acid · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
chitosan · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.