The DOI matches its Crossref record; 168 of the 168 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mycorrhizal types differ in ecophysiology and alter plant nutrition and soil processes
Abstract
Mycorrhizal fungi benefit plants by improved mineral nutrition and protection against stress, yet information about fundamental differences among mycorrhizal types in fungi and trees and their relative importance in biogeochemical processes is only beginning to accumulate. We critically review and synthesize the ecophysiological differences in ectomycorrhizal, ericoid mycorrhizal and arbuscular mycorrhizal symbioses and the effect of these mycorrhizal types on soil processes from local to global scales. We demonstrate that guilds of mycorrhizal fungi display substantial differences in genome‐encoded capacity for mineral nutrition, particularly acquisition of nitrogen and phosphorus from organic material. Mycorrhizal associations alter the trade‐off between allocation to roots or mycelium, ecophysiological traits such as root exudation, weathering, enzyme production, plant protection, and community assembly as well as response to climate change. Mycorrhizal types exhibit differential effects on ecosystem carbon and nutrient cycling that affect global elemental fluxes and may mediate biome shifts in response to global change. We also note that most studies performed to date have not been properly replicated and collectively suffer from strong geographical sampling bias towards temperate biomes. We advocate that combining carefully replicated field experiments and controlled laboratory experiments with isotope labelling and ‐omics techniques offers great promise towards understanding differences in ecophysiology and ecosystem services among mycorrhizal types.
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
(2008) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-370526-6.x5001-6 · Cited by 7,431
Van Der Heijden, M. G. A., Bardgett, R. D., & Van Straalen, N. M. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01139.x · Cited by 5,053
Soil bacterial and fungal communities across a pH gradient in an arable soil
Rousk, J., Bååth, E., Brookes, P. C., Lauber, C. L., Lozupone, C., Caporaso, J. G., Knight, R., & Fierer, N. (2010) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2010.58 · Cited by 4,223
Cotrufo, M. F., Wallenstein, M. D., Boot, C. M., Denef, K., & Paul, E. (2013) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.12113 · Cited by 3,552
AUGUSTUS: ab initio prediction of alternative transcripts
Stanke, M., Keller, O., Gunduz, I., Hayes, A., Waack, S., & Morgenstern, B. (2006) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkl200 · Cited by 2,829
Fast Genome-Wide Functional Annotation through Orthology Assignment by eggNOG-Mapper
Huerta-Cepas, J., Forslund, K., Coelho, L. P., Szklarczyk, D., Jensen, L. J., von Mering, C., & Bork, P. (2017) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msx148 · Cited by 2,709
Structure and function of the global topsoil microbiome
Bahram, M., Hildebrand, F., Forslund, S. K., Anderson, J. L., Soudzilovskaia, N. A., Bodegom, P. M., Bengtsson-Palme, J., Anslan, S., Coelho, L. P., Harend, H., et al. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0386-6 · Cited by 2,538
Self-citationFeed Your Friends: Do Plant Exudates Shape the Root Microbiome?
Sasse, J., Martinoia, E., & Northen, T. (2018) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2017.09.003 · Cited by 2,216
Water relations, drought and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis
Augé, R. M. (2001) · Mycorrhiza · doi:10.1007/s005720100097 · Cited by 2,210
Global patterns of plant leaf N and P in relation to temperature and latitude
Reich, P. B., & Oleksyn, J. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0403588101 · Cited by 2,125
Cited by
How mycorrhizal associations drive plant population and community biology
Tedersoo, L., Bahram, M., & Zobel, M. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aba1223 · Cited by 1,045
Self-citationGlobal mycorrhizal plant distribution linked to terrestrial carbon stocks
Soudzilovskaia, N. A., van Bodegom, P. M., Terrer, C., Zelfde, M. V., McCallum, I., Luke McCormack, M., Fisher, J. B., Brundrett, M. C., de Sá, N. C., & Tedersoo, L. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13019-2 · Cited by 341
Self-citationGlobal spectra of plant litter carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and returning amounts
Yuan, J., Wu, F., Peng, C., Peñuelas, J., Vallicrosa, H., Sardans, J., Peng, Y., Wu, Q., Li, Z., Heděnec, P., et al. (2024) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.14250 · Cited by 25
Dietterich, L. H., Karpman, J., Neupane, A., Ciochina, M., & Cusack, D. F. (2021) · Biogeochemistry · doi:10.1007/s10533-021-00836-1 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Tedersoo, L., & Bahram, M.
- Venue
- Biological Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-07-03
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1857-1880
- ISSN
- 0006-3231 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-7931
- 1469-185X
- OpenAlex
- W2954486764
- Cited by
- 377
- References
- 168
- FWCI
- 4.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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 types differ in ecophysiology and alter plant nutrition and soil processes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/brv.12538
- The paper
- Tedersoo, L., & Bahram, M. (2019). Mycorrhizal types differ in ecophysiology and alter plant nutrition and soil processes. Biological Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12538
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.
