Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,615

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evolutionary history of mycorrhizal symbioses and global host plant diversity

Open access
Brundrett, Mark C., Tedersoo, Leho·2018·New Phytologist

Abstract

Contents Summary 1108 I. Introduction 1108 II. Mycorrhizal plant diversity at global and local scales 1108 III. Mycorrhizal evolution in plants: a brief update 1111 IV. Conclusions and perspectives 1114 References 1114 Summary: The majority of vascular plants are mycorrhizal: 72% are arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM), 2.0% are ectomycorrhizal (EcM), 1.5% are ericoid mycorrhizal and 10% are orchid mycorrhizal. Just 8% are completely nonmycorrhizal (NM), whereas 7% have inconsistent NM–AM associations. Most NM and NM–AM plants are nutritional specialists (e.g. carnivores and parasites) or habitat specialists (e.g. hydrophytes and epiphytes). Mycorrhizal associations are consistent in most families, but there are exceptions with complex roots (e.g. both EcM and AM). We recognize three waves of mycorrhizal evolution, starting with AM in early land plants, continuing in the Cretaceous with multiple new NM or EcM linages, ericoid and orchid mycorrhizas. The third wave, which is recent and ongoing, has resulted in root complexity linked to rapid plant diversification in biodiversity hotspots.

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.14976

Cites

36 of 36 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 1,615

Metadata

Authors
Brundrett, M. C., & Tedersoo, L.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-01-22
Volume
220
Issue
4
Pages
1108-1115
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2792482912
Cited by
1,615
References
36
FWCI
93.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.