title: Contrasting ontogenetic trajectories for phenolic and terpenoid defences in Eucalyptus froggattii.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Plant defence metabolites are considered costly due to diversion of energy and nutrients away from growth. These costs combined with changes in resource availability and herbivory throughout plant ontogeny are likely to promote changes in defence metabolites. A comprehensive understanding of plant defence strategy requires measurement of lifetime ontogenetic trajectories--a dynamic component largely overlooked in plant defence theories. This study aimed to compare ontogenetic trajectories of foliar phenolics and terpenoids. Phenolics are predicted to be inexpensive to biosynthesize, whereas expensive terpenoids also require specialized, non-photosynthetic secretory structures to avoid autotoxicity. Based on these predicted costs, it is hypothesized that phenolics would be maximally deployed early in ontogeny, whereas terpenoids would be maximally deployed later, once the costs of biosynthesis and foregone photosynthesis could be overcome by enhanced resource acquisition.
  
  
  METHODS
  Leaves were harvested from a family of glasshouse-grown Eucalyptus froggattii seedlings, field-grown saplings and the maternal parent tree, and analysed for total terpenoids and phenolics.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Foliar phenolics were highest in young seedlings and lowest in the adult tree. Indeed the ratio of total phenolics to total terpenoids decreased in a significantly exponential manner with plant ontogeny. Most individual terpene constituents increased with plant ontogeny, but some mono- and sesquiterpenes remained relatively constant or even decreased in concentration as plants aged.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Plant ontogeny can influence different foliar defence metabolites in directionally opposite ways, and the contrasting trajectories support our hypothesis that phenolics would be maximally deployed earlier than terpenoids. The results highlight the importance of examining ontogenetic trajectories of defence traits when developing and testing theories of plant defence, and illustrate an advantage of concurrently studying multiple defences.
authors: School of Botany, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 3010. jgoodger@unimelb.edu.au
authors: Jason Q D
authors: JQ
authors: Goodger
authors: Allison M
authors: AM
authors: Heskes
authors: Ian E
authors: IE
authors: Woodrow
mesh_terms: D005052:Eucalyptus / Q000254:growth & development / Q000378:metabolism*; D010636:Phenols / Q000378:metabolism*; D018515:Plant Leaves / Q000378:metabolism; D036226:Seedlings / Q000378:metabolism; D013729:Terpenes / Q000378:metabolism*
chemical_list: D010636:Phenols; D013729:Terpenes
keywords: Chemical defence cost; Eucalyptus froggattii; herbivory; monoterpene; monoterpene acid glucose ester; ontogenetic trajectory; ontogeny; phenolic; secondary metabolite; sesquiterpene; terpenoid
references: Plant Physiol. 2003 Jul;132(3):1586-99
references: 12857838
references: Plant Methods. 2010 Sep 01;6:20
references: 20807444
references: Nat Prod Rep. 2001 Aug;18(4):361-79
references: 11548048
references: Plant Cell. 2007 Jun;19(6):1994-2005
references: 17557809
references: FEBS Lett. 2008 Mar 5;582(5):565-72
references: 18242187
references: J Chem Ecol. 2011 Mar;37(3):286-300
references: 21336682
references: Plant Physiol. 2002 Jul;129(3):1222-31
references: 12114576
references: Oecologia. 1993 Oct;95(4):551-557
references: 28313296
references: Oecologia. 2002 Jun;132(1):77-85
references: 28547283
references: Oecologia. 2005 Mar;143(1):117-25
references: 15742219
references: Oecologia. 2002 Nov;133(3):288-294
references: 28466223
references: Plant Physiol. 2004 Aug;135(4):1956-66
references: 15299125
references: Oecologia. 1984 Dec;65(1):58-69
references: 28312110
references: Am Nat. 2010 Apr;175(4):481-93
references: 20170370
references: Nat Chem Biol. 2007 Jul;3(7):408-14
references: 17576428
references: Carbohydr Res. 2010 Sep 23;345(14):2079-84
references: 20708173
references: Phytochemistry. 2011 Dec;72(18):2325-34
references: 21945721
references: Phytochemistry. 2010 Jun;71(8-9):844-52
references: 20399476
references: Phytochemistry. 2007 Nov-Dec;68(22-24):2722-35
references: 17643453
references: Funct Plant Biol. 2004 Jun;31(5):451-460
references: 32688917
references: J Chem Ecol. 2008 Feb;34(2):153-67
references: 18213498
references: Funct Plant Biol. 2006 May;33(5):497-505
references: 32689256
references: J Chem Ecol. 1991 Jan;17(1):123-34
references: 24258438
references: Oecologia. 1988 Jul;76(2):278-282
references: 28312207
references: J Chem Ecol. 1995 Jul;21(7):883-96
references: 24234407
references: Plant Physiol. 2004 Aug;135(4):2098-105
references: 15299118
references: Phytochemistry. 2007 Jun;68(12):1632-41
references: 17524436
references: Drug Metab Rev. 1997 Feb-May;29(1-2):213-8
references: 9187519
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Aug;20(8):441-8
references: 16701415
references: J Org Chem. 2010 Aug 20;75(16):5590-600
references: 20704432
references: Science. 1985 Nov 22;230(4728):895-9
references: 17739203
references: Plant Mol Biol. 2007 Sep;65(1-2):107-24
references: 17611797
references: J Chem Ecol. 1994 Jun;20(6):1281-328
references: 24242341
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40856
references: 22911712
references: Phytochemistry. 2011 Dec;72(18):2259-66
references: 21945720
references: Oecologia. 2007 Oct;153(4):799-808
references: 17605051