ArticleBiology letters2018
More partners, more ranges: generalist legumes spread more easily around the globe.
Article in Biology letters, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Soil microbiota promote the success of the perennial legume Lupinus polyphyllus more strongly in invasive than in native populations.Annals of botany · 2026Article
- Soil microbiota enhance the population growth rate of a nitrogen-fixing herbaceous legume.AoB PLANTS · 2025Article
- Uncovering the reciprocal effects of plant polyploidy and the microbiome: implications for understanding of polyploid success.The New phytologist · 2025Review
- Generalized mutualisms promote range expansion in both plant and ant partners.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Plant-Environment Response Pathway Regulation Uncovered by Investigating Non-Typical Legume Symbiosis and Nodulation.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Host-Associated Rhizobial Fitness: Dependence on Nitrogen, Density, Community Complexity, and Legume Genotype.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2022Article
- Legume germination is delayed in dry soils and in sterile soils devoid of microbial mutualists: Species-specific implications for upward range expansions.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Comparative genomics reveals high rates of horizontal transfer and strong purifying selection on rhizobial symbiosis genes.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Mutualistic Outcomes Across Plant Populations, Microbes, and Environments in the Duckweed Lemna minor.Microbial ecology · 2020Article
- Article
- More partners, more ranges: generalist legumes spread more easily around the globe.Biology letters · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How does mutualism affect range expansion? On the one hand, mutualists might thrive in new habitats thanks to the resources, stress tolerance or defence provided by their partners. On the other, specialized mutualists might fail to find compatible partners beyond their range margins, limiting further spread. A recent global analysis of legume ranges found that non-symbiotic legumes have been successfully introduced to more ranges than legumes that form symbioses with rhizobia, but there is still abundant unexplained variation in introduction success within symbiotic legumes. We test the hypothesis that generalist legumes have spread to more ranges than specialist legumes. We used published data and rhizobial 16S rRNA sequences from GenBank to quantify the number of rhizobia partners that associate with 159 legume species, spanning the legume phylogeny and the globe. We found that generalist legumes occur in more introduced ranges than specialist legumes, suggesting that among mutualists, specialization hinders range expansions.
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.