Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23917611›Full record

SynthesisMycorrhiza2014

Influence of arbuscular mycorrhiza on growth and reproductive response of plants under water deficit: a meta-analysis.

Benjamin Jayne, Martin Quigley

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Mycorrhiza, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 181 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Roots' Drought Adaptive Traits in Crop Improvement.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Benjamin JayneUniversity of Denver, Denver, CO, USA, benjamin.s.jayne@gmail.com.
Martin Quigley
University of Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite a large body of literature that describes the effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization on plant response to water deficit, reviews of these works have been mainly in narrative form, and it is therefore difficult to quantify the magnitude of the effect. We performed a meta-analysis to examine the effect of mycorrhizal colonization on growth and yield of plants exposed to water deficit stress. Data were compared in the context of annual vs. perennial plants, herbaceous vs. woody plants, field vs. greenhouse conditions, degree of stress, functional group, regions of plant growth, and mycorrhizal and host species. We found that, in terms of biomass measurements, mycorrhizal plants have better growth and reproductive response under water stress compared to non-mycorrhizal plants. When variables such as habit, life cycle, or water stress level are considered, differences in mycorrhizal effect on plant growth between variables are observed. While growth of both annual and perennial plants is improved by symbiosis, perennials respond more favorably to colonization than annuals. Overall, our meta-analysis reveals a quantifiable corroboration of the commonly held view that, under water-deficit conditions, plants colonized by mycorrhizal fungi have better growth and reproductive response than those that are not.

Indexed as

DesiccationPlant DevelopmentReproductionStress, PhysiologicalSymbiosisMycorrhizaePlant Physiological PhenomenaPlants

Identifiers

PMID23917611
OpenAlexW2012887550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.