Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 668

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 912 of the 912 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A starting guide to root ecology: strengthening ecological concepts and standardising root classification, sampling, processing and trait measurements

Open access
Freschet, Grégoire T., Pagès, Loïc, Iversen, Colleen M., Comas, Louise H., Rewald, Boris, Roumet, Catherine, Klimešová, Jitka, Zadworny, Marcin, Poorter, Hendrik, Postma, Johannes A., Adams, Thomas S., Bagniewska‐Zadworna, Agnieszka, Bengough, A. Glyn, Blancaflor, Elison B., Brunner, Ivano, Cornelissen, Johannes H. C., Garnier, Eric, Gessler, Arthur, Hobbie, Sarah E., Meier, Ina C., Mommer, Liesje, Picon‐Cochard, Catherine, Rose, Laura, Ryser, Peter, Scherer‐Lorenzen, Michael, Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A., Stokes, Alexia, Sun, Tao, Valverde‐Barrantes, Oscar J., Weemstra, Monique, Weigelt, Alexandra, Wurzburger, Nina, York, Larry M., Batterman, Sarah A., Gomes de Moraes, Moemy, Janeček, Štěpán, Lambers, Hans, Salmon, Verity, Tharayil, Nishanth, McCormack, M. Luke·2021·New Phytologist

Abstract

Summary: In the context of a recent massive increase in research on plant root functions and their impact on the environment, root ecologists currently face many important challenges to keep on generating cutting‐edge, meaningful and integrated knowledge. Consideration of the below‐ground components in plant and ecosystem studies has been consistently called for in recent decades, but methodology is disparate and sometimes inappropriate. This handbook, based on the collective effort of a large team of experts, will improve trait comparisons across studies and integration of information across databases by providing standardised methods and controlled vocabularies. It is meant to be used not only as starting point by students and scientists who desire working on below‐ground ecosystems, but also by experts for consolidating and broadening their views on multiple aspects of root ecology. Beyond the classical compilation of measurement protocols, we have synthesised recommendations from the literature to provide key background knowledge useful for: (1) defining below‐ground plant entities and giving keys for their meaningful dissection, classification and naming beyond the classical fine‐root vs coarse‐root approach; (2) considering the specificity of root research to produce sound laboratory and field data; (3) describing typical, but overlooked steps for studying roots (e.g. root handling, cleaning and storage); and (4) gathering metadata necessary for the interpretation of results and their reuse. Most importantly, all root traits have been introduced with some degree of ecological context that will be a foundation for understanding their ecological meaning, their typical use and uncertainties, and some methodological and conceptual perspectives for future research. Considering all of this, we urge readers not to solely extract protocol recommendations for trait measurements from this work, but to take a moment to read and reflect on the extensive information contained in this broader guide to root ecology, including sections I–VII and the many introductions to each section and root trait description. Finally, it is critical to understand that a major aim of this guide is to help break down barriers between the many subdisciplines of root ecology and ecophysiology, broaden researchers’ views on the multiple aspects of root study and create favourable conditions for the inception of comprehensive experiments on the role of roots in plant and ecosystem functioning.

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.17572

Cites

912 of 912 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

1 retracted

Show all 912 references

Metadata

Authors
Freschet, G. T., Pagès, L., Iversen, C. M., Comas, L. H., Rewald, B., Roumet, C., Klimešová, J., Zadworny, M., Poorter, H., Postma, J. A., Adams, T. S., Bagniewska‐Zadworna, A., Bengough, A. G., Blancaflor, E. B., Brunner, I., Cornelissen, J. H. C., Garnier, E., Gessler, A., Hobbie, S. E., Meier, I. C., Mommer, L., Picon‐Cochard, C., Rose, L., Ryser, P., Scherer‐Lorenzen, M., Soudzilovskaia, N. A., Stokes, A., Sun, T., Valverde‐Barrantes, O. J., Weemstra, M., Weigelt, A., Wurzburger, N., York, L. M., Batterman, S. A., Gomes de Moraes, M., Janeček, Š., Lambers, H., Salmon, V., Tharayil, N., & McCormack, M. L.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-10-05
Volume
232
Issue
3
Pages
973-1122
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W3080688640
Cited by
668
References
912
FWCI
53.52
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: A starting guide to root ecology: strengthening ecological concepts and standardising root classification, sampling, processing and trait measurements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/nph.17572
The paper
Freschet, G. T., Pagès, L., Iversen, C. M., Comas, L. H., Rewald, B., Roumet, C., Klimešová, J., Zadworny, M., Poorter, H., Postma, J. A., Adams, T. S., Bagniewska‐Zadworna, A., Bengough, A. G., Blancaflor, E. B., Brunner, I., Cornelissen, J. H. C., Garnier, E., Gessler, A., Hobbie, S. E., . . . McCormack, M. L. (2021). A starting guide to root ecology: strengthening ecological concepts and standardising root classification, sampling, processing and trait measurements. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17572

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.