The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mycorrhizal Networks: Common Goods of Plants Shared under Unequal Terms of Trade
Open accessAbstract
Plants commonly live in a symbiotic association with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). They invest photosynthetic products to feed their fungal partners, which, in return, provide mineral nutrients foraged in the soil by their intricate hyphal networks. Intriguingly, AMF can link neighboring plants, forming common mycorrhizal networks (CMNs). What are the terms of trade in such CMNs between plants and their shared fungal partners? To address this question, we set up microcosms containing a pair of test plants, interlinked by a CMN of Glomus intraradices or Glomus mosseae. The plants were flax (Linum usitatissimum; a C3 plant) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor; a C4 plant), which display distinctly different 13C/12C isotope compositions. This allowed us to differentially assess the carbon investment of the two plants into the CMN through stable isotope tracing. In parallel, we determined the plants’ “return of investment” (i.e. the acquisition of nutrients via CMN) using 15N and 33P as tracers. Depending on the AMF species, we found a strong asymmetry in the terms of trade: flax invested little carbon but gained up to 94% of the nitrogen and phosphorus provided by the CMN, which highly facilitated growth, whereas the neighboring sorghum invested massive amounts of carbon with little return but was barely affected in growth. Overall biomass production in the mixed culture surpassed the mean of the two monocultures. Thus, CMNs may contribute to interplant facilitation and the productivity boosts often found with intercropping compared with conventional monocropping.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters
Murphy, J., & Riley, J. P. (1962) · Analytica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/s0003-2670(00)88444-5 · Cited by 21,093
Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People
Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1185383 · Cited by 11,943
Phillips, J. M., & Hayman, D. S. (1970) · Transactions of the British Mycological Society · doi:10.1016/s0007-1536(70)80110-3 · Cited by 8,495
STABLE ISOTOPES IN ECOSYSTEM STUDIES
Peterson, B. J., & Fry, B. (1987) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.18.110187.001453 · Cited by 5,406
McGONIGLE, T. P., MILLER, M. H., EVANS, D. G., FAIRCHILD, G. L., & SWAN, J. A. (1990) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.1990.tb00476.x · Cited by 3,878
Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant biodiversity, ecosystem variability and productivity
van der Heijden, M. G. A., Klironomos, J. N., Ursic, M., Moutoglis, P., Streitwolf-Engel, R., Boller, T., Wiemken, A., & Sanders, I. R. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/23932 · Cited by 3,553
Self-citationArbuscular mycorrhiza: the mother of plant root endosymbioses
Parniske, M. (2008) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1987 · Cited by 2,167
Reciprocal Rewards Stabilize Cooperation in the Mycorrhizal Symbiosis
Kiers, E. T., Duhamel, M., Beesetty, Y., Mensah, J. A., Franken, O., Verbruggen, E., Fellbaum, C. R., Kowalchuk, G. A., Hart, M. M., Bago, A., et al. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1208473 · Cited by 1,791
Smith, S. E., & Smith, F. A. (2011) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042110-103846 · Cited by 1,679
VARIATION IN PLANT RESPONSE TO NATIVE AND EXOTIC ARBUSCULAR MYCORRHIZAL FUNGI
Klironomos, J. N. (2003) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/02-0413 · Cited by 1,213
Cited by
Cell and Developmental Biology of Arbuscular Mycorrhiza Symbiosis
Gutjahr, C., & Parniske, M. (2013) · Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev-cellbio-101512-122413 · Cited by 565
Biodiversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and ecosystem function
Powell, J. R., & Rillig, M. C. (2018) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.15119 · Cited by 508
The Future of Complementarity: Disentangling Causes from Consequences
Barry, K. E., Mommer, L., van Ruijven, J., Wirth, C., Wright, A. J., Bai, Y., Connolly, J., De Deyn, G. B., de Kroon, H., Isbell, F., et al. (2019) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2018.10.013 · Cited by 459
Zhang, L., Xu, M., Liu, Y., Zhang, F., Hodge, A., & Feng, G. (2016) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.13838 · Cited by 437
The Potential Role of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in the Restoration of Degraded Lands
Asmelash, F., Bekele, T., & Birhane, E. (2016) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.01095 · Cited by 294
Metadata
- Authors
- Walder, F., Niemann, H., Natarajan, M., Lehmann, M. F., Boller, T., & Wiemken, A.
- Venue
- Plant Physiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2012-04-19
- Volume
- 159
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 789-797
- ISSN
- 0032-0889 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2548
- OpenAlex
- W2143288352
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 40
- FWCI
- 21.21
- 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 Networks: Common Goods of Plants Shared under Unequal Terms of Trade. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1104/pp.112.195727
- The paper
- Walder, F., Niemann, H., Natarajan, M., Lehmann, M. F., Boller, T., & Wiemken, A. (2012). Mycorrhizal Networks: Common Goods of Plants Shared under Unequal Terms of Trade. Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.112.195727
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.
