Herbivore-induced defenses are not under phylogenetic constraints in the genus (oak): Phylogenetic patterns of growth, defense, and storage.

The evolution of plant defenses is often constrained by phylogeny. Many of the differences between competing plant defense theories hinge upon the differences in the location of meristem damage (apical versus auxiliary) and the amount of tissue removed. We analyzed the growth and defense responses of 12 (oak) species from a well-resolved molecular phylogeny using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Access to light is paramount for forest-dwelling tree species, such as many members of the genus . We therefore predicted a greater investment in defense when apical meristem tissue was removed. We also predicted a greater investment in defense when large amounts of tissue were removed and a greater investment in growth when less tissues were removed. We conducted five simulated herbivory treatments including a control with no damage and alterations of the location of meristem damage (apical versus auxiliary shoots) and intensity (25% versus 75% tissue removal). We measured growth, defense, and nutrient re-allocation traits in response to simulated herbivory. Phylomorphospace models were used to demonstrate the phylogenetic nature of trade-offs between characteristics of growth, chemical defenses, and nutrient re-allocation. We found that growth-defense trade-offs in control treatments were under phylogenetic constraints, but phylogenetic constraints and growth-defense trade-offs were not common in the simulated herbivory treatments. Growth-defense constraints exist within the genus, although there are adaptations to herbivory that vary among species.