Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 412

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 112 of the 112 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mycorrhizal mycelium as a global carbon pool

Open access
Hawkins, Heidi-Jayne, Cargill, Rachael I.M., Van Nuland, Michael E., Hagen, Stephen C., Field, Katie J., Sheldrake, Merlin, Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A., Kiers, E. Toby·2023·Current Biology

Abstract

For more than 400 million years, mycorrhizal fungi and plants have formed partnerships that are crucial to the emergence and functioning of global ecosystems. The importance of these symbiotic fungi for plant nutrition is well established. However, the role of mycorrhizal fungi in transporting carbon into soil systems on a global scale remains under-explored. This is surprising given that ∼75% of terrestrial carbon is stored belowground and mycorrhizal fungi are stationed at a key entry point of carbon into soil food webs. Here, we analyze nearly 200 datasets to provide the first global quantitative estimates of carbon allocation from plants to the mycelium of mycorrhizal fungi. We estimate that global plant communities allocate 3.93 Gt CO2e per year to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, 9.07 Gt CO2e per year to ectomycorrhizal fungi, and 0.12 Gt CO2e per year to ericoid mycorrhizal fungi. Based on this estimate, 13.12 Gt of CO2e fixed by terrestrial plants is, at least temporarily, allocated to the underground mycelium of mycorrhizal fungi per year, equating to ∼36% of current annual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. We explore the mechanisms by which mycorrhizal fungi affect soil carbon pools and identify approaches to increase our understanding of global carbon fluxes via plant–fungal pathways. Our estimates, although based on the best available evidence, are imperfect and should be interpreted with caution. Nonetheless, our estimations are conservative, and we argue that this work confirms the significant contribution made by mycorrhizal associations to global carbon dynamics. Our findings should motivate their inclusion both within global climate and carbon cycling models, and within conservation policy and practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2023.02.027

Cites

112 of 112 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 112 references

Cited by

See all 412

Metadata

Authors
Hawkins, H.-J., Cargill, R. I. M., Van Nuland, M. E., Hagen, S. C., Field, K. J., Sheldrake, M., Soudzilovskaia, N. A., & Kiers, E. T.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-06
Volume
33
Issue
11
Pages
R560-R573
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4379468507
Cited by
412
References
112
FWCI
57.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mycorrhizal mycelium as a global carbon pool. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cub.2023.02.027
The paper
Hawkins, H.-J., Cargill, R. I. M., Van Nuland, M. E., Hagen, S. C., Field, K. J., Sheldrake, M., Soudzilovskaia, N. A., & Kiers, E. T. (2023). Mycorrhizal mycelium as a global carbon pool. Current Biology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2023.02.027

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.