Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37898611›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Plants forage for soil patches free of plastic pollution but cannot bag the profits.

Benedikt Speißer, Mark van Kleunen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Benedikt SpeißerEcology, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78464, Constance, Germany. benedikt.speisser@uni-konstanz.de.ORCID 0000-0003-0459-4304
Mark van KleunenEcology, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78464, Constance, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2861-3701

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microplastics can affect their surroundings physically and chemically, resulting in diverse effects on plant-soil systems. Similar to other substances (e.g. nutrients and water), microplastics in the environment occur in patches. Such heterogeneous distributions could affect plant responses to plastic pollution. Yet, this has remained untested. We conducted a multispecies experiment including 29 herbaceous plant species and three different microplastic treatments (a control without microplastics, a homogeneous and a heterogeneous microplastic distribution). Based on biomass and root-morphological traits, we assessed how different plastic distributions affect the performance and root-foraging behavior of plants, and whether stronger root foraging is beneficial when microplastics are distributed patchily. Next to general effects on plant productivity and root morphology, we found very strong evidence for root-foraging responses to patchy plastic distributions, with a clear preference for plastic-free patches, resulting in 25% longer roots and 20% more root biomass in the plastic-free patches. Interestingly, however, these foraging responses were correlated with a reduced plant performance, indicating that the benefits of plastic avoidance did not compensate for the associated investments. Our results provide new insights in plant-microplastic interactions and suggest that plants might not just be passively affected by but could also actively respond to environmental plastic pollution.

Indexed as

MicroplasticsSoilPlant RootsPlantsPlasticsMicroplasticsPlasticsSoil

Identifiers

PMID37898611
PMCPMC10613303

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.