Brandenburg, Anna

Up a level
Export as [feed] RSS
Group by: Date | Item Type | Refereed | No Grouping
Jump to: 2015 | 2014 | 2012 | 2011 | 2009

2015

Hermann, Katrin; Klahre, Ulrich; Venail, Julien; Brandenburg, Anna; Kuhlemeier, Cris (2015). The genetics of reproductive organ morphology in two Petunia species with contrasting pollination syndromes. Planta, 241(5), pp. 1241-1254. Springer 10.1007/s00425-015-2251-2

2014

D'Alessandro, Marco; Erb, Matthias; Ton, Jurriaan; Brandenburg, Anna; Karlen, Danielle; Zopfi, Jakob; Turlings, Ted C. J. (2014). Volatiles produced by soil-borne endophytic bacteria increase plant pathogen resistance and affect tritrophic interactions. Plant, Cell & Environment, 37(4), pp. 813-826. Blackwell Science 10.1111/pce.12220

2012

Brandenburg, Anna; Kuhlemeier, Cris; Bshary, Redouan (2012). Innate Adjustment of Visitation Behavior to Rewarding and Reward-Minimized Petunia axillaris (Solanacea) Plants by Hawkmoth Manduca sexta (Sphingidae). Ethology, 118(7), pp. 654-661. Berlin: Wiley-Blackwell 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2012.02055.x

Brandenburg, Anna; Kuhlemeier, Cris; Bshary, Redouan (2012). Hawkmoth Pollinators Decrease Seed Set of a Low-Nectar Petunia axillaris Line through Reduced Probing Time. Current Biology, 22(17), pp. 1635-1639. Cambridge, Mass.: Cell Press 10.1016/j.cub.2012.06.058

2011

Bossolini, Eligio; Klahre, Ulrich; Brandenburg, Anna; Reinhardt, Didier; Kuhlemeier, Cris (2011). High resolution linkage maps of the model organism Petunia reveal substantial synteny decay with the related genome of tomato. Genome, 54(4), pp. 327-340. Ottawa: National Research Council of Canada 10.1139/g10-116

Brandenburg, Anna; Bshary, Redouan (2011). Variable responses of hawkmoths to nectar-depleted plants in two native Petunia axillaris (Solanaceae) populations. Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 5(2), pp. 141-148. Springer 10.1007/s11829-011-9122-y

2009

Brandenburg, Anna; Dell'Olivo, Alexandre; Bshary, Redouan; Kuhlemeier, Cris (2009). The sweetest thing Advances in nectar research. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 12(4), pp. 486-490. London: Elsevier Science 10.1016/j.pbi.2009.04.002

Provide Feedback