ArticlePloS one2017
Ectomycorrhizal fungal communities in endangered Pinus amamiana forests.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- IntroducingFungal systematics and evolution · 2024Article
- Soil propagule banks of ectomycorrhizal fungi associated withMycoscience · 2022Article
- Diversity and community structure of ectomycorrhizal fungi in Pinus thunbergii coastal forests bordering the Yellow Sea of China.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2021Article
- Taxonomic Revision of the GenusMycobiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Genetically determined fungal pathogen tolerance and soil variation influence ectomycorrhizal traits of loblolly pine.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Soil propagule bank of ectomycorrhizal fungi associated with Masson pine (Pinus massoniana) grown in a manganese mine wasteland.PloS one · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interactions between trees and ectomycorrhizal (ECM) fungi are critical for the growth and survival of both partners. However, ECM symbiosis in endangered trees has hardly been explored, complicating conservation efforts. Here, we evaluated resident ECM roots and soil spore banks of ECM fungi from endangered Pinus amamiana forests on Yakushima and Tanegashima Islands, Kagoshima Prefecture, Japan. Soil samples were collected from remaining four forests in the two islands. The resident ECM roots in soil samples were subjected to molecular identification. Soil spore banks of ECM fungi were analyzed via bioassays using a range of host seedlings (P. amamiana, P. parviflora, P. densiflora and Castanopsis sieboldii) for 6-8 months. In all remaining P. amamiana forests, we discovered a new Rhizopogon species (Rhizopogon sp.1), the sequence of which has no match amoung numerous Rhizopogon sequences deposited in the international sequence database. Host identification of the resident ECM roots confirmed that Rhizopogon sp.1 was associated only with P. amamiana. Rhizopogon sp.1 was far more dominant in soil spore banks than in resident ECM roots, and its presence was confirmed in nearly all soil samples examined across the major remaining populations. While Rhizopogon sp.1 did not completely lose compatibility to other pine species, its infection rate in the bioassays was highest in the original host, P. amamiana, the performance of which was improved by the infection. These results indicate that Rhizopogon sp.1 is very likely to have a close ecological relationship with endangered P. amamiana, probably due to a long co-evolutionary period on isolated islands, and to play the key role in seedling establishment after disturbance. We may need to identify and utilize such key ECM fungi to conserve endangered trees practically.
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.