Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 331

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Insights On the Impact of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Symbiosis On Tomato Tolerance to Water Stress

Open access
Chitarra, Walter, Pagliarani, Chiara, Maserti, Biancaelena, Lumini, Erica, Siciliano, Ilenia, Cascone, Pasquale, Schubert, Andrea, Gambino, Giorgio, Balestrini, Raffaella, Guerrieri, Emilio·2016·Plant Physiology
DOI 10.1104/pp.16.00307
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi, which form symbioses with the roots of the most important crop species, are usually considered biofertilizers, whose exploitation could represent a promising avenue for the development in the future of a more sustainable next-generation agriculture. The best understood function in symbiosis is an improvement in plant mineral nutrient acquisition, as exchange for carbon compounds derived from the photosynthetic process: this can enhance host growth and tolerance to environmental stresses, such as water stress (WS). However, physiological and molecular mechanisms occurring in arbuscular mycorrhiza-colonized plants and directly involved in the mitigation of WS effects need to be further investigated. The main goal of this work is to verify the potential impact of AM symbiosis on the plant response to WS To this aim, the effect of two AM fungi (Funneliformis mosseae and Rhizophagus intraradices) on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) under the WS condition was studied. A combined approach, involving ecophysiological, morphometric, biochemical, and molecular analyses, has been used to highlight the mechanisms involved in plant response to WS during AM symbiosis. Gene expression analyses focused on a set of target genes putatively involved in the plant response to drought, and in parallel, we considered the expression changes induced by the imposed stress on a group of fungal genes playing a key role in the water-transport process. Taken together, the results show that AM symbiosis positively affects the tolerance to WS in tomato, with a different plant response depending on the AM fungi species involved.

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 · 10.1104/pp.16.00307

Cites

75 of 75 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

Cited by

See all 331

Metadata

Authors
Chitarra, W., Pagliarani, C., Maserti, B., Lumini, E., Siciliano, I., Cascone, P., Schubert, A., Gambino, G., Balestrini, R., & Guerrieri, E.
Venue
Plant Physiology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2016-04-19
Volume
171
Issue
2
Pages
pp.00307.2016
ISSN
  • 0032-0889 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2548
DOI
10.1104/pp.16.00307
OpenAlex
W2338615089
Cited by
331
References
75
FWCI
22.80
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

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.