1. HERBIVORE LOADS CAN BE HEAVY
CLOVER – SPP.
CORN – 300+ SPP.
APPLES – 400 SPP.
AMERICAN ELM – 600+ SPP.
OAKS – 1500 SPP.
GOLDENROD – 150 SPP.

2. HERBIVORE LOAD INCLUDES GENERALISTS AND SPECIALISTS
1. MONOPHAGOUS
2. OLIGOPHAGOUS
3. POLYPHAGOUS
4. ALL PLANT PARTS UTILIZED
DEFOLIATORS VS. SAP SUCKERS
STEM AND RHIZOME BORERS
SEED AND FLOWER PREDATORS

3. INVASIVE SPECIES FREQUENTLY ESCAPE HERBIVORES
1. CANADIAN THISTLE
2. JAPANESE KNOTWEED
3. GOATWEED
4. WATER HYACINTH
5. JAPANESE HONEYSUCKLE
6. GARLIC MUSTARD
7. RAGWEED (INTRO. INTO RUSSIA)

4. FEEDING HABITS 1. CHEWING INSECTS 2. SUCKING INSECTS
DEFOLIATORS
LEAF TIERS AND ROLLERS
BORERS
2. SUCKING INSECTS
PHLOEM VS. XYLEM FEEDERS
3. GALL-MAKING INSECTS
800 SPECIES ON VARIOUS S[PECIES OF OAKS
CANCER-LIKE GROWTH FEEDS AND PROTECTS GALL MAKER

5. NUTRIENT QUALTY OF PLANTS IS LOW
1. PLANT TISSUE COMPOSED LARGELY OF WATER AND POORLY DIGESTIBLE CELLULOSE
2. POOR NUTRIENT STATE COMPENSATED BY THE ABUNDANCE
OF PLANTS
3. NITROGEN IS ESPECIALLY LOW

6. SOME NUTRIENT QUANTITIES
1. FRESH WEIGHT OF LEAVES IS 90% WATER, 1-3% PROTEINS, WITH THE REST BEING CARBOHYDRATES (MONO-, DI-, POLYSACCHARIDES)
2. SEEDS HAVE LESS WATER AND MORE PROTEIN (A VALUABLE RESOURCE)
3. ACTIVE MERISTEM RELATIVELY HIGH IN NUTRIENTS, BUT IS LITTLE USED

7. HYPOTHESES CONCERNING HOST SELECTION
1. THE NUTRIENT SCHOOL HYPOTHESIS
2. THE SECONDARY PLANT SUBSTANCE HYPOTHESIS

8. MANY SECONDARY PLANT CHEMICALS
1. GLUCOSIDES (E.G., MUSTARD OILS)
2. ALKALOIDS (E.G., NICOTINE)
3. PHENOLS
4. TERPENES (E.G., TURPENTINE)
5. TANNINS
6. SAPONINS
7. PYRETHRUMS
8. HORMONES (E.G., PHYTOECDYSONE)

9. PLANT DEFENSES 1. NON-CHEMICAL DEFENSES 2. CHEMICAL DEFENSES
ESCAPE IN SPACE
ESCAPE IN TIME
USE SATIATION
STRUCTURAL DEFENSES (COLOR SHIFTS, HARDEN TISSUES, ACQUIRE TRICHOMES, SPINES, BRISTLES OR SPURS, HAVE SILICA OR WAXES)
2. CHEMICAL DEFENSES
USE A VARIETY OF SECONDARY PLANT SUBSTANCES