Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34602656›Full record

ArticleSoil biology & biochemistry2021

Comparing root exudate collection techniques: An improved hybrid method.

Alex Williams, Holly Langridge, Angela L Straathof, Graeme Fox, Howbeer Muhammadali, Katherine A Hollywood, Yun Xu, Royston Goodacre, Franciska T de Vries

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Soil biology & biochemistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Nitrogen Input Alters Root Exudation ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Root Exudates in Soilless Culture Conditions.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Alex WilliamsSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9PT, Manchester, UK.
Holly LangridgeSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9PT, Manchester, UK.
Angela L StraathofSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9PT, Manchester, UK.
Graeme FoxEcology and Environment Research Centre, Department of Natural Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK.
Howbeer MuhammadaliDepartment of Biochemistry and Systems Biology, Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology (ISMIB), University of Liverpool, Biosciences Building, Crown Street, L69 7ZB, Liverpool, UK.
Katherine A HollywoodManchester Institute of Biotechnology, The University of Manchester, Princess Road, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
Yun XuDepartment of Biochemistry and Systems Biology, Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology (ISMIB), University of Liverpool, Biosciences Building, Crown Street, L69 7ZB, Liverpool, UK.
Royston GoodacreDepartment of Biochemistry and Systems Biology, Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology (ISMIB), University of Liverpool, Biosciences Building, Crown Street, L69 7ZB, Liverpool, UK.
Franciska T de VriesSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9PT, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

1. Plant-microbe interactions are critical for ecosystem functioning and drive rhizosphere processes. Root exudates are an important soil carbon (C) input, as well as a mechanism for communication between plants and rhizosphere microbes, but are notoriously difficult to extract and characterise. Common methods produce either substantial noise from the soil or do not mimic natural systems. Optimising methods for root exudate collection in soil is crucial for advancing our understanding of root-microbe interactions under changing environmental conditions. 2. Hybrid root exudate collection methods, where plants are grown in soil and transferred to hydroponics for exudate collection after root washing, might offer an ecologically relevant alternative to existing approaches. However, this method causes potential root damage as well as osmosis and subsequent leaking of cell contents. Here, we assessed different 'root recovery' periods after root washing and before hybrid root exudate collection, by comparing root exudate quantity and quality with both damaged root extracts and with leachates collected from the intact root-soil system. This was done across three common grassland species representing three functional groups. 3. We found that root exudate profiles of the shortest recovery period (0 days) were similar to damaged root extracts and were very high in C. With an increasing period of root recovery, profiles were more similar to leachates collected from the intact root-soil system, and C concentrations decreased. While both hybrid and leachate collection methods separated species by their root exudate profiles, the hybrid method was less variable in terms of the amount of C measured and provided a more diverse and abundant metabolome with better identification of metabolites. 4. Our results show that a recovery period after root washing of at least 3 days is critical to prevent root damage bias in hybrid collection methods, and that our hybrid method yields exudates that discriminate between species. Our data also suggest that exudates collected with this hybrid method are ecologically valid, which is vital for gaining a mechanistic understanding of their role in ecosystem functioning.

Indexed as

CarbonPlant-microbe communicationRhizosphereRoot exudatesRoot traits

Identifiers

PMID34602656
PMCPMC8444088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.