Abstract
The resource availability hypothesis (RAH), the most successful theory explaining plant defence patterns, predicts that defence investment is related to the relative growth rate (RGR) of plant species, which is associated with habitat quality. Thus, fast-growing species should show lower resistance than slow-growing species, which would lead fast growers to sustain higher herbivory rates, but the fitness consequences of herbivory would be greater for slow growers. The latter is often assumed but rarely tested. In a temperate rainforest, we tested the expected pattern of tolerance to herbivory derived from the RAH: that fast-growing species should be more tolerant than slow-growing species. We also evaluated whether other plant features covary with RGR (leaf lifespan, shade tolerance and leaf toughness) and thus could also contribute to the patterns of tolerance to herbivory. As expected, seedlings from tree species with higher RGR showed greater tolerance to herbivory. Among the three plant features included, only leaf lifespan showed a significant association with RGR, but RGR was the best predictor of tolerance. We argue that plant tolerance to herbivory must be evaluated to properly verify the assumptions of the RAH.