The paleosymbiosis hypothesis: host plants can be colonised by root symbionts that have been inactive for centuries to millenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Paleoecologists have speculated that post-glacial migration of tree species could have been facilitated by mycorrhizal symbionts surviving glaciation as resistant propagules belowground. The general premise of this idea, which we call the 'paleosymbiosis hypothesis', is that host plants can access and be colonised by fungal root symbionts that have been inactive for millennia. Here, we explore the plausibility of this hypothesis by synthesising relevant findings from a diverse literature. For example, the paleoecology literature provided evidence of modern roots penetrating paleosols containing ancient (>6000 years) fungal propagules, though these were of unknown condition. With respect to propagule longevity, the available evidence is of mixed quality, but includes convincing examples consistent with the paleosymbiosis hypothesis (i.e. >1000 years viable propagules). We describe symbiont traits and environmental conditions that should favour the development and preservation of an ancient propagule bank, and discuss the implications for our understanding of soil symbiont diversity and ecosystem functioning. We conclude that the paleosymbiosis hypothesis is plausible in locations where propagule deposition and preservation conditions are favourable (e.g. permafrost regions). We encourage future belowground research to consider and explore the potential temporal origins of root symbioses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".