ArticleOecologia2024
Effects of kinship and integration between adjacent/non-adjacent ramets on the growth and feedback with soil biota in a clonal invader.
Article in Oecologia, 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.
- Invasive plants have stronger root recognition capabilities than native plants.The New phytologist · 2026Article
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
Abstract
Many invasive plants can reproduce through both seeds and clonal growth. In habitats, interacting seedlings may originate from the same mother, and interacting ramets originating from the same plant may not be adjacent to each other in the stolon, particularly for vines that can show curved growth. However, in a homogeneous environment, how kinship and integration between adjacent/non-adjacent ramets affect plant growth and feedback with soil biota has been less studied. We address these questions using an invasive stoloniferous vine Mikania micrantha. We found that sibling groups and stranger groups did not differ in biomass production, root allocation and feedback with soil biota, indicating that kin recognition is unlikely in M. micrantha. For two-ramet stolon fragments in which interacting ramets were adjacent to each other, older ramets allocated more biomass to roots than younger ramets when integrated, particularly in comparison with disconnected ramets from different genotypes, indicating that a division of labor was induced. For four-ramet stolon fragments in which there were two unrooted ramets between the two rooted, interacting ramets, integration increased biomass allocation to roots, possibly because only two of the four ramets could absorb belowground resources and a lower shoot allocation decreased aboveground light competition. When inoculated with soil biota conditioned by the four-ramet integrated fragments, plants of M. micrantha also increased biomass allocation to roots. These results indicate that the distance between interacting ramets in the stolon may affect the integration effect and feedback with soil biota in clonal plants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39134878What 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.