ArticleMycorrhiza2024
Soil compaction reversed the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on soil hydraulic properties.
Article in Mycorrhiza, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Drink quickly. Mycorrhizal roots deplete water faster from wet soil.Mycorrhiza · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) typically provide a wide range of nutritional benefits to their host plants, and their role in plant water uptake, although still controversial, is often cited as one of the hallmarks of this symbiosis. Less attention has been dedicated to other effects relating to water dynamics that the presence of AMF in soils may have. Evidence that AMF can affect soil hydraulic properties is only beginning to emerge. In one of our recent experiments with dwarf tomato plants, we serendipitously found that the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus (Rhizophagus irregularis 'PH5') can slightly but significantly reduce water holding capacity (WHC) of the substrate (a sand-zeolite-soil mixture). This was further investigated in a subsequent experiment, but there we found exactly the opposite effect as mycorrhizal substrate retained more water than did the non-mycorrhizal substrate. Because the same substrate was used and other conditions were mostly comparable in the two experiments, we explain the contrasting results by different substrate compaction, most likely caused by different pot shapes. It seems that in compacted substrates, AMF may have no effect upon or even decrease the substrates' WHC. On the other hand, the AMF hyphae interweaving the pores of less compacted substrates may increase the capillary movement of water throughout such substrates and cause slightly more water to remain in the pores after the free water has drained. We believe that this phenomenon is worthy of mycorrhizologists' attention and merits further investigation as to the role of AMF in soil hydraulic properties.
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.