Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31923325›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology2020

Share the wealth: Trees with greater ectomycorrhizal species overlap share more carbon.

Ido Rog, Nicholas P Rosenstock, Christian Körner, Tamir Klein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular ecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Differential Strategies of Ectomycorrhizal Development betweenJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ido RogDepartment of Plant & Environmental Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-9120-3617
Nicholas P RosenstockCenter for Environmental and Climate Research, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Christian KörnerDepartment of Environmental Sciences - Botany, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Tamir KleinDepartment of Plant & Environmental Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel.

Funding

European Research Council 849740
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mutualistic symbiosis between forest trees and ectomycorrhizal fungi (EMF) is among the most ubiquitous and successful interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. Specific species of EMF are known to colonize specific tree species, benefitting from their carbon source, and in turn, improving their access to soil water and nutrients. EMF also form extensive mycelial networks that can link multiple root-tips of different trees. Yet the number of tree species connected by such mycelial networks, and the traffic of material across them, are just now under study. Recently we reported substantial belowground carbon transfer between Picea, Pinus, Larix and Fagus trees in a mature forest. Here, we analyze the EMF community of these same individual trees and identify the most likely taxa responsible for the observed carbon transfer. Among the nearly 1,200 EMF root-tips examined, 50%-70% belong to operational taxonomic units (OTUs) that were associated with three or four tree host species, and 90% of all OTUs were associated with at least two tree species. Sporocarp

Indexed as

CarbonMycorrhizaeEcosystemPlant RootsTreesCarbonhost geneticsmycorrhizaSebacinastable isotopestemperate forest

Identifiers

PMID31923325
PMCPMC7116085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.