Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27255514›Full record

ArticleAoB PLANTS2016

The structure of legume-rhizobium interaction networks and their response to tree invasions.

Johannes J Le Roux, Natasha R Mavengere, Allan G Ellis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AoB PLANTS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The spread of non-native species.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. The alien ACommunicative & integrative biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Rhizobial inoculation in black wattle plantation (Acacia mearnsii De Wild.) in production systems of southern Brazil.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Johannes J Le RouxDepartment of Botany and Zoology, Centre for Invasion Biology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, 7602, South Africa jacoleroux01@gmail.com.
Natasha R MavengereDepartment of Botany and Zoology, Centre for Invasion Biology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, 7602, South Africa.
Allan G EllisDepartment of Botany and Zoology, Centre for Invasion Biology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, 7602, South Africa.
Stellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Establishing mutualistic interactions in novel environments is important for the successful establishment of some non-native plant species. These associations may, in turn, impact native species interaction networks as non-natives become dominant in their new environments. Using phylogenetic and ecological interaction network approaches we provide the first report of the structure of belowground legume-rhizobium interaction networks and how they change along a gradient of invasion (uninvaded, semi invaded and heavily invaded sites) by Australian Acacia species in South Africa's Cape Floristic Region. We found that native and invasive legumes interact with distinct rhizobial lineages, most likely due to phylogenetic uniqueness of native and invasive host plants. Moreover, legume-rhizobium interaction networks are not nested, but significantly modular with high levels of specialization possibly as a result of legume-rhizobium co-evolution. Although network topology remained constant across the invasion gradient, composition of bacterial communities associated with native legumes changed dramatically as acacias increasingly dominated the landscape. In stark contrast to aboveground interaction networks (e.g. pollination and seed dispersal) we show that invasive legumes do not infiltrate existing native legume-rhizobium networks but rather form novel modules. This absence of mutualist overlap between native and invasive legumes suggests the importance of co-invading rhizobium-acacia species complexes for Acacia invasion success, and argues against a ubiquitous role for the formation and evolutionary refinement of novel interactions.

Indexed as

Biological invasionsco-introductioncosmopolitan rhizobialegume–rhizobium interaction websnetwork specialization

Identifiers

PMID27255514
PMCPMC4940501
OpenAlexW2411986579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.