ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Predicted Effects of Climate Change on Future Distributions of Ectomycorrhizal Fungi.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impacts of ectomycorrhizal forest change on nutrient cycling, forest resilience, and ecosystem services.The ISME journal · 2026Review
- Predicted Effects of Climate Change on Future Distributions of Ectomycorrhizal Fungi.Ecology and evolution · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To model the distribution of ectomycorrhizal (ECM) fungi to (i) analyse climate change impacts on their future distribution areas and centroids and (ii) analyse their distribution changes by ECM fungal host specificity. Location: Europe. Time period: 2041-2100. Major taxa studied: Ectomycorrhizal fungi. We modelled the distributions of 60 common ECM fungal species in European forests and projected their future distributions under three different shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP126, SSP370 and SSP585) for 2041-2070 and 2071-2100. Both abiotic and biotic (host tree distribution) variables were included in the modelling, with ECM fungal species classified into broadleaf specialists (19), conifer specialists (22) and generalists (19). We estimated changes in both the areas and geographic centroids between the projected future and current distributions for each species and for each ECM fungal host specificity group. We found that host tree distributions make strong contributions to ECM fungal distribution models, but their influence varied with ECM fungal host specificity. The distributions of most ECM fungal species are projected to decline (ranging from 0.2% to 64%) and shift northward under the three climate scenarios in both 2041-2070 and 2071-2100, and most ECM fungal conifer specialists are projected to lose more of their current distribution compared to broadleaf specialists and generalists. Substantial decline of studied ECM fungal co-occurrence is projected in southern England, central Europe, Finland and Sweden. Our results evidence ECM fungi will be mostly negatively affected by climate change, but this will vary with host specificity. Thus, conservation actions need tailored actions for the different groups. Conifer specialists need special attention, either through targeted monitoring or by assessing their conservation status. Overall, a conservation plan for fungi is needed under climate change scenarios.
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.