Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39982554›Full record

ArticleMycorrhiza2025

Dynamics of pine ectomycorrhizae following root disturbance.

Gavin Kernaghan, Britanie LeFait, Ayesha Hussain

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mycorrhiza, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Gavin KernaghanDepartment of Biology, Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, NS, Canada. gavin.kernaghan@msvu.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5052-3630
Britanie LeFaitDepartment of Biology, Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Ayesha HussainDepartment of Biology, Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ectomycorrhizae (ECM) and their hyphae may account for up to one-third of forest productivity, but we know little about their patterns of decomposition and recruitment. ECM decomposition rates are governed in part by the identity of the symbiont, while the species that colonize new fine roots are determined by a number of abiotic and biotic filters, including the developmental stage of the root system and hyphal network. Sections of forest floor humus were excised from mature pine stands (severing all roots), replaced and randomly sampled over time. Decomposing ECM and ECM forming on newly growing roots were tracked over 15 months by ITS sequencing. ECM were no longer observed on original roots 13 months post-disturbance, while ECM appeared on new roots after 10 months. Individually, the dominant ECM fell into three categories. 1) Cenococcum geophilum decomposed and recruited slowly, 2) Suillus spraguei and Russula spp. decomposed rapidly but exhibited minimal recruitment during the experiment, and 3) Clavulina coralloides and Lactifluus/Lactarius spp. degraded rapidly but also recruited rapidly onto new roots. Our results indicate that rates of ECM decomposition vary among fungal symbionts, and that root severing appears to shift the ECM community to a slightly earlier successional stage. The lack of recruitment of ECM formed by truly early-stage species is likely due to the low level of soil disturbance, which should be advantageous in the context of forest regeneration.

Indexed as

MycorrhizaePinusPlant RootsForestsSoil MicrobiologySymbiosisCenococcumEctomycorrhizal decompositionEctomycorrhizal recruitmentEctomycorrhizal successionSevered roots

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.