Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 352

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The origin and evolution of mycorrhizal symbioses: from palaeomycology to phylogenomics

Strullu‐Derrien, Christine, Selosse, Marc‐André, Kenrick, Paul, Martin, Francis M.·2018·New Phytologist

Abstract

Contents Summary 1012 I. Introduction 1013 II. The mycorrhizal symbiosis at the dawn and rise of the land flora 1014 III. From early land plants to early trees: the origin of roots and true mycorrhizas 1016 IV. The diversification of the AM symbiosis 1019 V. The ECM symbiosis 1021 VI. The recently evolved ericoid and orchid mycorrhizas 1023 VII. Limits of paleontological vs genetic approaches and perspectives 1023 Acknowledgements 1025 References 1025 Summary: The ability of fungi to form mycorrhizas with plants is one of the most remarkable and enduring adaptations to life on land. The occurrence of mycorrhizas is now well established in c. 85% of extant plants, yet the geological record of these associations is sparse. Fossils preserved under exceptional conditions provide tantalizing glimpses into the evolutionary history of mycorrhizas, showing the extent of their occurrence and aspects of their evolution in extinct plants. The fossil record has important roles to play in establishing a chronology of when key fungal associations evolved and in understanding their importance in ecosystems through time. Together with calibrated phylogenetic trees, these approaches extend our understanding of when and how groups evolved in the context of major environmental change on a global scale. Phylogenomics furthers this understanding into the evolution of different types of mycorrhizal associations, and genomic studies of both plants and fungi are shedding light on how the complex set of symbiotic traits evolved. Here we present a review of the main phases of the evolution of mycorrhizal interactions from palaeontological, phylogenetic and genomic perspectives, with the aim of highlighting the potential of fossil material and a geological perspective in a cross‐disciplinary approach.

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.15076

Cites

8 of 8 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 352

Metadata

Authors
Strullu‐Derrien, C., Selosse, M., Kenrick, P., & Martin, F. M.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03-24
Volume
220
Issue
4
Pages
1012-1030
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2792645927
Cited by
352
References
8
FWCI
27.11
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

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.