ArticleOecologia2018
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and associated microbial communities from dry grassland do not improve plant growth on abandoned field soil.
Article in Oecologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on morpho-biochemical characteristics, nutrient uptake, and transcriptomic profile of3 Biotech · 2025Article
- Specific Plant Mycorrhizal Responses Are Linked to Mycorrhizal Fungal Species Interactions.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Host-Specific Effects of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi on TwoJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Holobiont chronobiology: mycorrhiza may be a key to linking aboveground and underground rhythms.Mycorrhiza · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
After abandonment of agricultural fields, some grassland plant species colonize these sites with a frequency equivalent to dry grasslands (generalists) while others are missing or underrepresented in abandoned fields (specialists). We aimed to understand the inability of specialists to spread on abandoned fields by exploring whether performance of generalists and specialists depended on soil abiotic and/or biotic legacy. We performed a greenhouse experiment with 12 species, six specialists and six generalists. The plants were grown in sterile soil from dry grassland or abandoned field inoculated with microbial communities from one or the other site. Plant growth, abundance of mycorrhizal structures and plant response to inoculation were evaluated. We focused on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), one of the most important parts of soil communities affecting plant performance. The abandoned field soil negatively affected plant growth, but positively affected plant response to inoculation. The AMF community from both sites differed in infectivity and taxa frequencies. The lower AMF taxa frequency in the dry grassland soil suggested a lack of functional complementarity. Despite the fact that dry grassland AMF produced more arbuscules, the dry grassland inoculum did not improve phosphorus nutrition of specialists contrary to the abandoned field inoculum. Inoculum origin did not affect phosphorus nutrition of generalists. The lower effectiveness of the dry grassland microbial community toward plant performance excludes its inoculation in the abandoned field soil as a solution to allow settlement of specialists. Still, the distinct response of specialists and generalists to inoculation suggested that they differ in AMF responsiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29322323What 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.