Variability in plant nutrients reduces insect herbivore performance

Abstract

The performance and population dynamics of insect herbivores depend on the nutritive and defensive traits of their host plants1. The literature on plant–herbivore interactions focuses on plant trait mean values2,3,4, but recent studies showing the importance of plant genetic diversity for herbivores suggest that plant trait variance may be equally important5,6. The consequences of plant trait variance for herbivore performance, however, have been largely overlooked. Here we report an extensive assessment of the effects of within-population plant trait variance on herbivore performance using 457 performance datasets from 53 species of insect herbivores. We show that variance in plant nutritive traits substantially reduces mean herbivore performance via non-linear averaging of performance relationships that were overwhelmingly concave down. By contrast, relationships between herbivore performance and plant defence levels were typically linear, with variance in plant defence not affecting herbivore performance via non-linear averaging. Our results demonstrate that plants contribute to the suppression of herbivore populations through variable nutrient levels, not just by having low average quality as is typically thought. We propose that this phenomenon could play a key role in the suppression of herbivore populations in natural systems, and that increased nutrient heterogeneity within agricultural crops could contribute to the sustainable control of insect pests in agroecosystems.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: An illustration of Jensen’s inequality.
Figure 2: Empirical and theoretical performance curves.
Figure 3: The effect of variance in plant defensive and nutritive traits on herbivore growth and survival.

References

  1. 1

    Awmack, C. S. & Leather, S. R. Host plant quality and fecundity in herbivorous insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47, 817–844 (2002)

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Adler, F. R. & Karban, R. Defended fortresses or moving targets? Another model of inducible defenses inspired by military metaphors. Am. Nat. 144, 813–832 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Karban, R., Agrawal, A. A. & Mangel, M. The benefits of induced defenses against herbivores. Ecology 78, 1351–1355 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Herrera, C. M. Multiplicity in Unity: Plant Subindividual Variation & Interactions with Animals (Univ. Chicago Press, 2009)

  5. 5

    Crutsinger, G. M. et al. Plant genotypic diversity predicts community structure and governs an ecosystem process. Science 313, 966–968 (2006)

    ADS  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    McArt, S. H. & Thaler, J. S. Plant genotypic diversity reduces the rate of consumer resource utilization. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 280, 20130639 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Esquinas-Alcázar, J. Science and society: protecting crop genetic diversity for food security: political, ethical and technical challenges. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6, 946–953 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Díaz, S. & Cabido, M. Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16, 646–655 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Wood, S. A. et al. Functional traits in agriculture: agrobiodiversity and ecosystem services. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 531–539 (2015)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Whitham, T. G. in Variable Plants and Herbivores in Natural and Managed Systems (eds Denno, R. F. & McClure, M. S. ) 15–41 (Academic Press, 1983)

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Ruel, J. J. & Ayres, M. P. Jensen’s inequality predicts effects of environmental variation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 361–366 (1999)

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Bolnick, D. I. et al. Why intraspecific trait variation matters in community ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 183–192 (2011)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Jensen, J. L. W. V. Sur les fonctions convexes et les inegalites entre les valeurs moyennes. Acta Math. 30, 175–193 (1906)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Raubenheimer, D., Lee, K. P. & Simpson, S. J. Does Bertrand’s rule apply to macronutrients? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 272, 2429–2434 (2005)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Simpson, S. J. & Raubenheimer, D. A multi-level analysis of feeding behaviour: the geometry of nutritional decisions. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 342, 381–402 (1993)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Mertz, W. The essential trace elements. Science 213, 1332–1338 (1981)

    ADS  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Bertrand, G. On the role of trace substances in agriculture. Eighth Int. Congr. Appl. Chem. 28, 30–40 (1912)

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Calabrese, E. J. & Baldwin, L. A. Toxicology rethinks its central belief. Nature 421, 691–692 (2003)

    ADS  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Ali, J. G. & Agrawal, A. A. Specialist versus generalist insect herbivores and plant defense. Trends Plant Sci. 17, 293–302 (2012)

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Andow, D. A. Vegetational diversity and arthropod population response. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 36, 561–586 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Zhu, Y. et al. Genetic diversity and disease control in rice. Nature 406, 718–722 (2000)

    ADS  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Carmona, D., Lajeunesse, M. J. & Johnson, M. T. J. Plant traits that predict resistance to herbivores. Funct. Ecol. 25, 358–367 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Curtis, P. S., Mengersen, K., Lajeunesse, M. J., Rothstein, H. R. & Stewart, G. B. in Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution (eds Koricheva, J., Gurevitch, J. & Mengersen, K. ) 52–60 (Princeton Univ. Press, 2013)

  24. 24

    Wood, S. N. Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2006)

  25. 25

    R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/ (2015)

  26. 26

    Schluter, D. Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. Evolution 42, 849–861 (1988)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Rosenberg, M. S., Rothstein, H. R. & Gurevitch, J. in Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution (eds. Koricheva, J., Gurevitch, J. & Mengersen, K. ) 61–71 (Princeton Univ. Press, 2013)

  28. 28

    Viechtbauer, W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Softw. 36, 1–48 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. M. & Walker, S. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.7 (2014)

  30. 30

    Koricheva, J., Gurevitch, J. & Mengersen, K. (eds) Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution (Princeton Univ. Press, 2013)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Thaler, J. Rosenheim, A. Agrawal, and S. Ellner for comments on the manuscript; D. Strong, K. Poveda, A. Kessler, S. Schreiber and P. Grof-Tisza for discussions. This work was supported by grants from the Center for Population at the University of California, Davis.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

W.W. conceived the project. All authors contributed to the development of the question, interpreted the results, and commented on the manuscript. W.W., H.K., and M.R. collected data and assembled the database. W.W. and M.H. developed the methods. W.W. and R.K. wrote the manuscript. M.R., H.K., and W.W. made the figures.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William C. Wetzel.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks M. Ayres, B. Inouye, W. Viechtbauer and the other anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Figure 1 Graphical summary of database.

ac, Number of herbivore species per order (a), mobility of feeding stage (b), and host breadth (c). b, Each mobility level indicates the maximum extent at which the feeding stage of an herbivore commonly moves. For example, species in the ‘plant’ category move within plant individuals but do not typically move between plants. Species within the ‘patch’ category readily move among neighbouring plant individuals but do not typically move between patches of plants. Species in the ‘tissue’ category are restricted to a single organ within an individual plant (for example, leaf or root). Species in the ‘region’ category readily move among plant patches across entire geographic regions. c, Host breadth categories monophagous (mono), oligophagous (oligo), and polyphagous (poly) indicate that an herbivore species feeds on plant species in one genus, plant species across multiple genera within one plant family, and plant species across two or more plant families, respectively. dh, Number of herbivore performance curves per trait type (d), defence class (e), nutrient class (f), date of publication (g), and study sample size (h).

Extended Data Figure 2 Visual representation of quantitative methods.

Diagram summarizes the bootstrapping algorithm used to calculate a distribution of Jensen’s effects for each empirical dataset for herbivore growth. For more details and for differences in methods between growth and survival, see Methods and Supplementary Methods.

Extended Data Figure 3 Jensen’s effects by plant trait type (defences and nutrients) and mobility of the feeding stage.

Defence variance had mean effects near to zero and nutrient variability had generally negative effects regardless of the mobility of the feeding stage of the herbivore species. Species in the ‘plant’ category move within plant individuals but do not typically move between plants. Species within the ‘patch’ category readily move among neighbouring host plants but do not typically move between patches. Species within the ‘region’ category commonly move among host plant patches. Each point is one herbivore species, jittered for visibility. Diamonds and error bars show mean values and 95% confidence intervals. See Supplementary Methods for more details.

Extended Data Figure 4 Jensen’s effects by plant trait type (defences and nutrients) and host breadth.

Defence variance had mean effects near to zero and nutrient variability had generally negative effects regardless of the host breadth of the herbivore species. Oligophagous species (‘oligo’) feed on plant species in multiple genera but are restricted to one plant family. Polyphagous species (‘poly’) feed on plant species across two or more plant families. Each point represents one herbivore species, jittered for visibility. Diamonds and error bars are mean values with 95% confidence intervals. See Supplementary Methods for more details.

Extended Data Figure 5 Funnel plots for growth and survival.

a, b, The lack of a relationship between the sample size of a study and its Jensen’s effect for growth (a) or survival (b) suggests that publication bias did not have a major influence on the results. Dashed line shows zero. Solid lines show linear regressions for growth (F1,248 = 0.23, P = 0.63, R2 = 0.0) and survival (F1,203 = 1.04, P = 0.31, R2 = 0.0).

Extended Data Figure 6 Jensen’s effect for each observation by the year of publication for growth and survival.

a, b, The lack of temporal trends in Jensen’s effects for growth (a) or survival (b) suggests that publication bias did not play a major role.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Tables, a Supplementary Discussion and Supplementary References. (PDF 606 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wetzel, W., Kharouba, H., Robinson, M. et al. Variability in plant nutrients reduces insect herbivore performance. Nature 539, 425–427 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20140

Download citation

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.