Study
Volatile communication between plants that affects herbivory: a meta-analysis
Karban, R.; Yang, L. H.; Edwards, K. F.
Ecology Letters, 2014
Experiments in which plants were exposed to volatiles from damaged neighbours were pooled, and the effect on the receiver’s subsequent damage from herbivores was estimated across studies, laboratory and field.
- Studied in
- Tracheophyta
- Sample size
- published experiments on volatile-mediated plant responses
Receivers exposed to volatiles from damaged plants suffered consistently less herbivore damage than unexposed controls. The effect was robust across species and settings, and was larger when donor and receiver were closely related or grew close together.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Volatile cues from damaged plants reliably reduce herbivory on neighbouring plants, an effect general enough to be treated as an established phenomenon.
How NatureHQ reads it
This is the record NatureHQ points at when it says airborne signalling between plants is established, and it is worth noticing exactly what it establishes. Receivers respond, measurably and repeatably. It says nothing about whether the emitter benefits from being listened to — and the leading explanation is that a damaged plant is signalling to its own distant branches, with neighbours picking up what leaks out. Reliable eavesdropping is a real phenomenon and a different one from talking.
- Pooled experiments differ widely in species, dose and how volatiles were delivered.
- Mostly herbaceous plants over short periods; long-lived trees are under-represented.
- Measures the receiver’s outcome, not any benefit to the emitter, which is the question the word "communication" turns on.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Wiley journalsPublished in a Wiley journal.
This reference was resolved automatically against Crossref and OpenAlex on 2026-08-30.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-08-30.