ArticlePlant and soil2023
Using root economics traits to predict biotic plant soil-feedbacks.
Article in Plant and soil, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Plant-soil feedbacks benefit plant invaders under multiple global change factors.National science review · 2026Article
- Drier conditions diminish plant coexistence via soil microbes in a tropical humid forest.American journal of botany · 2026Article
- Genotype-Dependent Soil Legacy of Woodland Strawberry (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effects of Soil Properties on the Demography of Bud Banks in Different Degraded Meadows on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Plant-soil feedback responses to drought are species-specific and only marginally predicted by root traits.Plant and soil · 2025Article
- Using root economics traits to predict biotic plant soil-feedbacks.Plant and soil · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plant-soil feedbacks have been recognised as playing a key role in a range of ecological processes, including succession, invasion, species coexistence and population dynamics. However, there is substantial variation between species in the strength of plant-soil feedbacks and predicting this variation remains challenging. Here, we propose an original concept to predict the outcome of plant-soil feedbacks. We hypothesize that plants with different combinations of root traits culture different proportions of pathogens and mutualists in their soils and that this contributes to differences in performance between home soils (cultured by conspecifics) versus away soils (cultured by heterospecifics). We use the recently described root economics space, which identifies two gradients in root traits. A conservation gradient distinguishes fast vs. slow species, and from growth defence theory we predict that these species culture different amounts of pathogens in their soils. A collaboration gradient distinguishes species that associate with mycorrhizae to outsource soil nutrient acquisition vs. those which use a "do it yourself" strategy and capture nutrients without relying strongly on mycorrhizae. We provide a framework, which predicts that the strength and direction of the biotic feedback between a pair of species is determined by the dissimilarity between them along each axis of the root economics space. We then use data from two case studies to show how to apply the framework, by analysing the response of plant-soil feedbacks to measures of distance and position along each axis and find some support for our predictions. Finally, we highlight further areas where our framework could be developed and propose study designs that would help to fill current research gaps. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11104-023-05948-1.
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.