Cited by 108Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsPlant and fungal interactionsAgriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management

Effectiveness of two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on concentrations of essential oil and artemisinin in three accessions of Artemisia annua L.

Chaudhary, Vidhi, Kapoor, Rupam, Bhatnagar, A.K.·2008·Applied Soil Ecology

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted to study and compare the effectiveness of two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), Glomus macrocarpum (GM) and Glomus fasciculatum (GF) on three accessions of Artemisia annua. The AM inoculation significantly increased the production of herbage, dry weight of shoot, nutrient status (P, Zn and Fe) of shoot, concentration of essential oil and artemisinin in leaves as compared to non-inoculated plants. The extent of growth, nutrient concentration and production of secondary plant metabolites varied with the fungus-plant accession combination. The mycorrhizal dependency of the three accessions was related to the shoot: root ratio. Comparing the two fungal inoculants in regard to increase in essential oil concentration in shoot, the effectiveness of GF was more than that of GM. While in two accessions, GM was more effective in enhancing artemisinin concentration than GF. Increase in concentration of essential oil was found to be positively correlated to P-status of the plant. Conversely, no correlation was found between shoot-P and artemisinin concentration.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.apsoil.2008.04.003

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • G. macrocarpum resulted in the highest artemisinin concentration in accessions EC 202,429 and EC 353,508 at 0.178% and 0.221%, respectively, whereas G. fasciculatum increased artemisinin levels in accession EC 415,012 by 110%.

    “G. macrocarpum resulted in the highest artemisinin concentration in accessions EC 202,429 and EC 353,508 at 0.178% and 0.221%, respectively, whereas G.s fasciculatum increased artemisinin levels in accession EC 415,012 by 110% (Chaudhary et al. 2008).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chaudhary, V., Kapoor, R., & Bhatnagar, A. K.
Affiliations
University of Delhi (IN)
Venue
Applied Soil Ecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-09
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
174-181
ISSN
0929-1393 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2092979562
Cited by
108
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied Soil Ecology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and fungal interactions
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Agriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management
Keywords
arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, Glomus macrocarpum, Glomus fasciculatum, Artemisia annua, artemisinin, essential oils, plant secondary metabolites, mycorrhizal inoculation, plant accessions, root-shoot ratio, phosphorus status, zinc, iron, plant growth, nutrient status

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review