The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Plant–soil feedbacks: the past, the present and future challenges
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Plant–soil feedbacks is becoming an important concept for explaining vegetation dynamics, the invasiveness of introduced exotic species in new habitats and how terrestrial ecosystems respond to global land use and climate change. Using a new conceptual model, we show how critical alterations in plant–soil feedback interactions can change the assemblage of plant communities. We highlight recent advances, define terms and identify future challenges in this area of research and discuss how variations in strengths and directions of plant–soil feedbacks can explain succession, invasion, response to climate warming and diversity‐productivity relationships. While there has been a rapid increase in understanding the biological, chemical and physical mechanisms and their interdependencies underlying plant–soil feedback interactions, further progress is to be expected from applying new experimental techniques and technologies, linking empirical studies to modelling and field‐based studies that can include plant–soil feedback interactions on longer time scales that also include long‐term processes such as litter decomposition and mineralization. Significant progress has also been made in analysing consequences of plant–soil feedbacks for biodiversity‐functioning relationships, plant fitness and selection. To further integrate plant–soil feedbacks into ecological theory, it will be important to determine where and how observed patterns may be generalized, and how they may influence evolution. Synthesis. Gaining a greater understanding of plant–soil feedbacks and underlying mechanisms is improving our ability to predict consequences of these interactions for plant community composition and productivity under a variety of conditions. Future research will enable better prediction and mitigation of the consequences of human‐induced global changes, improve efforts of restoration and conservation and promote sustainable provision of ecosystem services in a rapidly changing world.
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
Ecological responses to recent climate change.
Walther, G.-R., Post, E., Convey, P., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T. J. C., Fromentin, J.-M., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., & Bairlein, F. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/416389a · Cited by 9,975
A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes
Jackson, R. B., Canadell, J., Ehleringer, J. R., Mooney, H. A., Sala, O. E., & Schulze, E. D. (1996) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/bf00333714 · Cited by 3,071
Invasive Plant Suppresses the Growth of Native Tree Seedlings by Disrupting Belowground Mutualisms
Stinson, K. A., Campbell, S. A., Powell, J. R., Wolfe, B. E., Callaway, R. M., Thelen, G. C., Hallett, S. G., Prati, D., & Klironomos, J. N. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040140 · Cited by 826 · cited 2×
“…Ecology, 101, 265–276 that have a more negative effect on the surrounding native plant species than on the exotics themselves (Mangla, Inderjit & Callaway 2008), or that reduce local mycorrhizal fungi (Stinson et al. 2006) are causing indirect net negative feedback effects to native plant species.”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe soil skeleton, a forgotten pool of carbon and nitrogen in soil
Corti, G., Ugolini, F. C., Agnelli, A., Certini, G., Cuniglio, R., Berna, F., & Fernández Sanjurjo, M. J. (2002) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2389.2002.00442.x · Cited by 78
Cited by
From patterns to causal understanding: Structural equation modeling (SEM) in soil ecology
Eisenhauer, N., Bowker, M. A., Grace, J. B., & Powell, J. R. (2015) · Pedobiologia · doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2015.03.002 · Cited by 417
Legacy effects of drought on plant–soil feedbacks and plant–plant interactions
Kaisermann, A., de Vries, F. T., Griffiths, R. I., & Bardgett, R. D. (2017) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.14661 · Cited by 328
Self-citationGaertner, M., Biggs, R., Te Beest, M., Hui, C., Molofsky, J., & Richardson, D. M. (2014) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/ddi.12182 · Cited by 311
Biotic plant–soil feedbacks across temporal scales
Kardol, P., De Deyn, G. B., Laliberté, E., Mariotte, P., & Hawkes, C. V. (2013) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12046 · Cited by 229
Self-citationBoom‐bust dynamics in biological invasions: towards an improved application of the concept
Strayer, D. L., D'Antonio, C. M., Essl, F., Fowler, M. S., Geist, J., Hilt, S., Jarić, I., Jöhnk, K., Jones, C. G., Lambin, X., et al. (2017) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12822 · Cited by 219
Metadata
- Authors
- van der Putten, W. H., Bardgett, R. D., Bever, J. D., Bezemer, T. M., Casper, B. B., Fukami, T., Kardol, P., Klironomos, J. N., Kulmatiski, A., Schweitzer, J. A., Suding, K. N., Van de Voorde, T. F. J., & Wardle, D. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-02-22
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 265-276
- ISSN
- 0022-0477 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2745
- OpenAlex
- W2076471462
- Cited by
- 1,758
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 70.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Plant–soil feedbacks: the past, the present and future challenges. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1365-2745.12054
- The paper
- van der Putten, W. H., Bardgett, R. D., Bever, J. D., Bezemer, T. M., Casper, B. B., Fukami, T., Kardol, P., Klironomos, J. N., Kulmatiski, A., Schweitzer, J. A., Suding, K. N., Van de Voorde, T. F. J., & Wardle, D. A. (2013). Plant–soil feedbacks: the past, the present and future challenges. Journal of Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12054
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.