The assembly of plant communities in relation to overlap in mycorrhizal and pathogenic root fungi
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Plant species commonly associate with symbiotic arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) and pathogenic root fungi, with many plants overlapping in their fungal community compositions. Overlap in AM fungi could promote coexistence by favouring competitively inferior or rare plants, or through the establishment of common mycorrhizal networks. Coexistence could also, however, be impeded if shared AM fungi disproportionately benefit competitively superior or abundant plant species. Overlap in pathogenic root fungi among closely growing plant species should increase the likelihood that an uninfected plant becomes infected, leading to reduced coexistence. Using vegetation plot data from an old‐field plant community along with high‐throughput sequence data on AM and pathogenic root fungal associations, we conducted three specific evaluations. First, we used null models to determine whether estimated overlap in AM or pathogenic root fungi among coexisting plant species was higher or lower than expected by chance. Second, we assessed whether estimated overlap in AM and pathogenic fungi differed between positively co‐occurring and negatively co‐occurring plant species. Third, we examined whether variation in plot‐level plant species richness was explained by the degree of estimated overlap in AM and pathogenic root fungi among those species. We found no evidence that estimated overlap in AM or pathogenic root fungal communities was higher or lower than expected under our null model. Additionally, positively and negatively co‐occurring pairs of plant species did not differ in their estimated overlap in either group of fungi. However, plant species richness was significantly higher in plots where plants were estimated to overlap more in AM fungi and significantly lower in plots where plant species were estimated to overlap more in pathogenic root fungi. Our results suggest that overlap in root fungal associations among plant species appears to be predictive of plant species richness, and therefore the assembly of plant communities. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».