ArticleMycorrhiza2017
Root-associated fungal communities in three Pyroleae species and their mycobiont sharing with surrounding trees in subalpine coniferous forests on Mount Fuji, Japan.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Positive citation bias and overinterpreted results lead to misinformation on common mycorrhizal networks in forests.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Review
- Article
- Root-Associated Fungal Communities in Two Populations of the Fully Mycoheterotrophic PlantMicroorganisms · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pyroleae species are perennial understory shrubs, many of which are partial mycoheterotrophs. Most fungi colonizing Pyroleae roots are ectomycorrhizal (ECM) and share common mycobionts with their Pyroleae hosts. However, such mycobiont sharing has neither been examined in depth before nor has the interspecific variation in sharing among Pyroleae species. Here, we examined root-associated fungal communities in three co-existing Pyroleae species, including Pyrola alpina, Pyrola incarnata, and Orthilia secunda, with reference to co-existing ECM fungi on the surrounding trees in the same soil blocks in subalpine coniferous forests. We identified 42, 75, and 18 fungal molecular operational taxonomic units in P. alpina, P. incarnata, and O. secunda roots, respectively. Mycobiont sharing with surrounding trees, which was defined as the occurrence of the same mycobiont between Pyroleae and surrounding trees in each soil block, was most frequent among P. incarnata (31 of 44 plants). In P. alpina, sharing was confirmed in 12 of 37 plants, and the fungal community was similar to that of P. incarnata. Mycobiont sharing was least common in O. secunda, found in only 5 of 32 plants. Root-associated fungi of O. secunda were dominated by Wilcoxina species, which were absent from the surrounding ECM roots in the same soil blocks. These results indicate that mycobiont sharing with surrounding trees does not equally occur among Pyroleae plants, some of which may develop independent mycorrhizal associations with ECM fungi, as suggested in O. secunda at our research sites.
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.