Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41823843›Full record

ArticleBiology2026

Root Fungal Endophyte Communities Differ Among Plant Functional Groups in an Alpine Meadow.

Miao Dong, Shucun Sun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Miao DongDepartment of Ecology, School of Life Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China.ORCID 0009-0004-7244-5217
Shucun SunDepartment of Ecology, School of Life Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0748-8048

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disparities in root fungal endophyte (RFE) communities are well documented among plant species, yet differences among plant functional groups (PFGs) remain unclear. Given that RFE community structure is influenced by host plant abundance and species-specific root functional traits, and that PFGs exhibit divergent relative abundances and root traits, we hypothesize that PFGs harbor unique RFE communities, potentially aligned with their functional traits. We investigated RFE communities in 45 alpine meadow species representing four PFGs (grasses, legumes, dicot forbs, and monocot forbs), using high-throughput sequencing. Ascomycota dominated all groups (>50%) except monocot forbs (38.9%). Distinct differences in the RFE community species composition were found among PFGs. In particular, the differences were significant between dicot forbs and monocot forbs, and between monocot forbs and grasses, which contradicted with conventional PFG classification that combined monocot and dicot forbs as a single PFG. Moreover, marker operational taxonomic units (OTUs) with symbiotic lifestyles were more abundant in legumes, and their functional composition differed significantly from grasses. Roots' nitrogen concentration was the strongest predictor of RFE variation, followed by root length, biomass, and species abundance. These results emphasize the importance of integrating microbial partners into understanding plants' functional diversity and ecosystem resilience in alpine environments.

Indexed as

nitrogen concentrationplant functional groupsroot biomassroot fungal endophyteroot lengthspecies abundance

Identifiers

PMID41823843
PMCPMC12984553

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.