Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36330301›Full record

ReviewEvolutionary applications2022

An evolutionary perspective on increasing net benefits to crops from symbiotic microbes.

R Ford Denison, Katherine E Muller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evolutionary applications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

2 authors.

R Ford DenisonEcology, Evolution, & Behavior University of Minnesota Saint Paul Minnesota USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8616-0846
Katherine E MullerEcology, Evolution, & Behavior University of Minnesota Saint Paul Minnesota USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant-imposed, fitness-reducing sanctions against less-beneficial symbionts have been documented for rhizobia, mycorrhizal fungi, and fig wasps. Although most of our examples are for rhizobia, we argue that the evolutionary persistence of mutualism in any symbiosis would require such sanctions, if there are multiple symbiont genotypes per host plant. We therefore discuss methods that could be used to develop and assess crops with stricter sanctions. These include methods to screen strains for greater mutualism as resources to identify crop genotypes that impose stronger selection for mutualism. Single-strain experiments that measure costs as well as benefits have shown that diversion of resources by rhizobia can reduce nitrogen-fixation efficiency (N per C) and that some legumes can increase this efficiency by manipulating their symbionts. Plants in the field always host multiple strains with possible synergistic interactions, so benefits from different strains might best be compared by regressing plant growth or yield on each strain's abundance in a mixture. However, results from this approach have not yet been published. To measure legacy effects of stronger sanctions on future crops, single-genotype test crops could be planted in a field that recently had replicated plots with different genotypes of the sanction-imposing crop. Enhancing agricultural benefits from symbiosis may require accepting tradeoffs that constrained past natural selection, including tradeoffs between current and future benefits.

Indexed as

agriculturemanipulationmutualismnitrogen fixationphytohormonesrhizobia

Identifiers

PMID36330301
PMCPMC9624085

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.