Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,552

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Competition between roots and microorganisms for nitrogen: mechanisms and ecological relevance

Open access
Kuzyakov, Yakov, Xu, Xingliang·2013·New Phytologist

Abstract

Summary: Demand of all living organisms on the same nutrients forms the basis for interspecific competition between plants and microorganisms in soils. This competition is especially strong in the rhizosphere. To evaluate competitive and mutualistic interactions between plants and microorganisms and to analyse ecological consequences of these interactions, we analysed 424 data pairs from 41 15 N‐labelling studies that investigated 15 N redistribution between roots and microorganisms. Calculated M ichaelis–M enten kinetics based on Km (Michaelis constant) and Vmax (maximum uptake capacity) values from 77 studies on the uptake of nitrate, ammonia, and amino acids by roots and microorganisms clearly showed that, shortly after nitrogen (N) mobilization from soil organic matter and litter, microorganisms take up most N. Lower Km values of microorganisms suggest that they are especially efficient at low N concentrations, but can also acquire more N at higher N concentrations (Vmax) compared with roots. Because of the unidirectional flow of nutrients from soil to roots, plants are the winners for N acquisition in the long run. Therefore, despite strong competition between roots and microorganisms for N, a temporal niche differentiation reflecting their generation times leads to mutualistic relationships in the rhizosphere. This temporal niche differentiation is highly relevant ecologically because it: protects ecosystems from N losses by leaching during periods of slow or no root uptake; continuously provides roots with available N according to plant demand; and contributes to the evolutionary development of mutualistic interactions between roots and microorganisms. Contents Summary 656 I. Introduction 657 II. General solution: trade of C for nutrients 657 III. Methods 658 IV. Interactions between roots and rhizosphere microorganisms 659 V. Potential of plants and microorganisms for N uptake by their competition 661 VI. Ecological relevance of competition between roots and microorganisms for N 662 VII. Effect of biotic and abiotic factors on N flows between microorganisms and roots 663 VIII. Conclusions and outlook 665 Acknowledgements 666 References 666

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 · 10.1111/nph.12235

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,552

Metadata

Authors
Kuzyakov, Y., & Xu, X.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03-22
Volume
198
Issue
3
Pages
656-669
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2134612321
Cited by
1,552
References
2
FWCI
70.75
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: Competition between roots and microorganisms for nitrogen: mechanisms and ecological relevance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/nph.12235
The paper
Kuzyakov, Y., & Xu, X. (2013). Competition between roots and microorganisms for nitrogen: mechanisms and ecological relevance. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12235

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.