ArticleMycorrhiza2017
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal community differences among European long-term observatories.
Article in Mycorrhiza, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-throughput sequencing analysis of the rhizosphere arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) community composition associated with Ferula sinkiangensis.BMC microbiology · 2020Article
- Unraveling spatiotemporal variability of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in a temperate grassland plot.Environmental microbiology · 2020Article
- Large elevation and small host plant differences in the arbuscular mycorrhizal communities of montane and alpine grasslands on the Tibetan Plateau.Mycorrhiza · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) communities have been demonstrated to respond to a variety of biotic and abiotic factors, including various aspects of land management. Numerous studies have specifically addressed the impact of land use on AMF communities, but usually have been confined to one or a few sites. In this study, soil AMF assemblages were described in four different long-term observatories (LTOs) across Europe, each of which included a site-specific high-intensity and a low-intensity land use. AMF communities were characterized on the basis of 454 sequencing of the internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) rDNA region. The primary goals of this study were (i) to determine the main factors that shape AMF communities in differentially managed sites in Europe and (ii) to identify individual AMF taxa or combinations of taxa suitable for use as biomarkers of land use intensification. AMF communities were distinct among LTOs, and we detected significant effects of management type and soil properties within the sites, but not across all sites. Similarly, indicator species were identified for specific LTOs and land use types but not universally for high- or low-intensity land uses. Different subsets of soil properties, including several chemical and physical variables, were found to be able to explain an important fraction of AMF community variation alone or together with other examined factors in most sites. The important factors were different from those for other microorganisms studied in the same sites, highlighting particularities of AMF biology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27942957What 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.