Abstract
SummaryThe influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on in vivo root initiation and development of Mr.S. 2/5 microcuttings was investigated. Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5, were placed in a sterile rooting mixture or inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi. A part of the uninoculated microcuttings received auxin treatment (IBA 200 mg F1) or were supplied with a non-sterile sievate of mycorrhizal inoculum. Rooting percentage, root system morphology and growth increments of in vivo rooted microcuttings were evaluated. In vivo rooting of Mr.S. 2/5 shoots was obtained successfully but mycorrhizal inoculation did not show a positive influence on rooting ability of microcuttings. First harvest of plantlets was carried out very early, when mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants showed no significant growth differences. By this time, AM fungi had greatly increased the proportion of the root system present as higher-order laterals and branching intensity of roots. No significant alterations in root system morphology were observed in plants grown in amended soil and in plants receiving IBA treatment. Moreover, mycorrhizal inoculation appeared very important for rapid acclimatization and growth of in vivo rooted microcuttings. Thus mycorrhizal symbiosis induced early resumption of shoot apical growth during the acclimatization phase of Mr.S. 2/5 plantlets. At final harvest, growth attributes of mycorrhizal plants were therefore notably higher than in all the other treatments, and were estimated comparable to those of in vitro rooted plantlets obtained according to the standard procedure. These results show that mycorrhizal symbiosis induced significant alterations in root system morphology in in vivo rooted microcuttings of Mr.S. 2/5 rootstock and that acclimatization and growth of in vivo rooted microcuttings was positively affected by AM fungal inoculation.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 8
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculation did not improve microcutting rooting ability.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.
Prunus cerasiferae0 - Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal inoculatione1
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale1symbiont
- Outcome
- rooting abilitye1
- Direction
- did not show a positive influencee1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“mycorrhizal inoculation did not show a positive influence on rooting ability of microcuttings”
Claim · model-written summary
At the first early harvest, mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants showed no significant growth difference.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizale1
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale1symbiont
- Outcome
- growth differencese1
- Direction
- no significante1
- Comparator
- non-mycorrhizal plantse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal plants showed no significant growth differences”
Claim · model-written summary
AM fungi increased higher-order lateral root proportion and root branching intensity.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- AM fungie1
- Interactor
- AM fungiGlomeromycotae1symbiont
- Outcome
- proportion of the root system present as higher-order laterals and branching intensity of rootse1
- Direction
- greatly increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“AM fungi had greatly increased the proportion of the root system present as higher-order laterals and branching intensity of roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Amended soil produced no significant root morphology alteration.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- amended soile1
- Outcome
- root system morphologye1
- Direction
- No significant alterationse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“No significant alterations in root system morphology were observed in plants grown in amended soil”
Claim · model-written summary
IBA treatment produced no significant root morphology alteration.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- IBA treatmente1
- Outcome
- root system morphologye1
- Direction
- No significant alterationse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“No significant alterations in root system morphology were observed in plants grown in amended soil and in plants receiving IBA treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal symbiosis induced early resumption of shoot apical growth during acclimatization.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal symbiosise1
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale1symbiont
- Outcome
- early resumption of shoot apical growthe1
- Direction
- early resumptione1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“mycorrhizal symbiosis induced early resumption of shoot apical growth during the acclimatization phase of Mr.S. 2/5 plantlets”
Claim · model-written summary
At final harvest, mycorrhizal plants had higher growth attributes than all other treatments.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizale1
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale1symbiont
- Outcome
- growth attributese1
- Direction
- notably highere1
- Comparator
- all the other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“At final harvest, growth attributes of mycorrhizal plants were therefore notably higher than in all the other treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
At final harvest, growth of mycorrhizal plants was comparable to standard in vitro rooted plantlets.
- Taxon
- Prunus cerasifera L.Prunus cerasiferae0
- Material
- Mr.S. 2/5e0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizale2
- Outcome
- growth attributese3
- Direction
- comparablee1
- Comparator
- in vitro rooted plantletse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Micropropagated shoots of the Prunus cerasifera L. rootstock, clone Mr.S. 2/5”
e1“were estimated comparable to those of in vitro rooted plantlets obtained according to the standard procedure”
e2“mycorrhizal inoculation did not show a positive influence on rooting ability of microcuttings”
e3“At final harvest, growth attributes of mycorrhizal plants were therefore notably higher than in all the other treatments”
The same questions in other papers
indole-3-butyric acid · growth · Prunus cerasifera (cherry plum)Positive and negative results
5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →mycorrhiza · growth · Prunus cerasifera (cherry plum)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.