ArticleMycorrhiza2011
Acaulospora brasiliensis comb. nov. and Acaulospora alpina (Glomeromycota) from upland Scotland: morphology, molecular phylogeny and DNA-based detection in roots.
Article in Mycorrhiza, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Geosiphon-Nostoc symbiosis: recent elaboration or remnant of an enduring association?Annals of botany · 2025Article
- Three New Species and a New Record of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi of the GenusJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Three new species of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Glomeromycota) andFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Phylogenetic Review ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal community divergence within a common host plant in two different soils in a subarctic Aeolian sand area.Mycorrhiza · 2014Article
- A history of the taxonomy and systematics of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi belonging to the phylum Glomeromycota.Mycorrhiza · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spores of two supposedly arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal species, new to the United Kingdom and recently described as Acaulospora alpina and Ambispora brasiliensis (Glomeromycota), were discovered in soil samples from moorland in upland Scotland. Soil and plant trap pot cultures were established, but attempts to establish these fungi in single-species pot cultures with Plantago lanceolata as host were unsuccessful. Nevertheless, based on a 1.5-kb DNA fragment spanning part of the small subunit rRNA gene, the internal transcribed spacer region and part of the large subunit rRNA gene, both these species could be detected directly in field-sampled roots, together with one uncultured species each of Scutellospora, Rhizophagus (former Glomus group Ab, or 'Glomus intraradices clade') and Acaulospora. Whereas A. alpina has characteristic morphological similarities to other species in its genus, A. brasiliensis morphologically has little in common with any other species in Ambispora. The molecular phylogeny, DNA barcoding and morphological evidence clearly place A. brasiliensis in the genus Acaulospora. We therefore rename the species, reported from Brazil and Scotland, as Acaulospora brasiliensis comb. nov., and discuss ecological aspects of the very different environments from which A. brasiliensis and A. alpina have been reported.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.