ArticleAIMS microbiology2018
Interactions between ectomycorrhizal fungi and chestnut blight (
Article in AIMS microbiology, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Into the void: ECM fungal communities involved in the succession from rockroses to oak stands.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Review of the Stress Resistance, Molecular Breeding, Health Benefits, Potential Food Products, and Ecological Value ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Endophytic Fungi and Ecological Fitness of Chestnuts.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Chestnuts bred for blight resistance depart nursery with distinct fungal rhizobiomes.Mycorrhiza · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plant and fungal interactions drive successional trajectories within reforestation offering both mutualisms (ectomycorrhizal fungi [ECM]) and fungal pathogens. Appalachian forest and mine reclamation projects re-introducing American chestnut and chestnut hybrids will inevitably document the return of chestnut blight, resulting in cankers causing branch dieback and loss of photosynthetic tissue. Similar to herbivory, the loss of photosynthetic tissue may reduce ECM root colonization and cause changes in fungal species composition. To test this, 75 six-year-old established chestnut trees were selected to represent the following: (1) Healthy trees free of chestnut blight; (2) trees with cankers and 50% branch dieback; (3) trees that died prior to the fifth growing season. Each tree had a chestnut seed planted 24 cm from the base. ECM colonization of both the established parent trees (n = 50) and five-month-old seedlings (n = 64) were quantified and genera determined by fungal DNA sequencing of the internal transcribed (ITS) region. Healthier seven-year-old chestnuts trees had significantly more ECM roots than those trees infected with chestnut blight cankers. However, disease die-back on chestnut did not have an influence on community composition among the parent trees or the neighboring five month seedlings. Results also demonstrated that five-month-old seedlings neighboring healthy parent trees had greater ECM on roots (
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.