Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizas (AM) can increase plant acquisition of P and N. No published studies have investigated the impact of P and AM on the allocation of N to the plant defence, cyanogenic glucosides. We investigated the effects of soil P and AM on cyanogenic glucoside (dhurrin) concentration in roots and shoots of two forage sorghum lines differing in cyanogenic potential (HCNp). Two harvest times allowed plants grown at high and low P to be compared at the same age and the same size, to take account of known ontogenetic changes in shoot HCNp. P responses were dependent on ontogeny and tissue type. At the same age, P-limited plants were smaller and had higher shoot HCNp but lower root HCNp. Ontogenetically controlled comparisons showed a P effect of lesser magnitude, and that there was also an increase in the allocation of N to dhurrin in shoots of P-limited plants. Colonization by AM had little effect on shoot HCNp, but increased root HCNp and the allocation of N to dhurrin in roots. Divergent responses of roots and shoots to P, AM and with ontogeny demonstrate the importance of broadening the predominantly foliar focus of plant defence studies/theory, and of ontogenetically controlled comparisons.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
At the same age, phosphorus limited sorghum plants were smaller.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“At the same age, P-limited plants were smaller and had higher shoot HCNp but lower root HCNp”
t0“forage sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
At the same age, phosphorus limitation raised shoot HCNp.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“At the same age, P-limited plants were smaller and had higher shoot HCNp but lower root HCNp”
t0“forage sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
At the same age, phosphorus limitation lowered root HCNp.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“At the same age, P-limited plants were smaller and had higher shoot HCNp but lower root HCNp”
t0“forage sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
Ontogenetically controlled comparisons showed a smaller phosphorus effect.
Verbatim
e0“Ontogenetically controlled comparisons showed a P effect of lesser magnitude”
t0“forage sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
Phosphorus limitation increased shoot nitrogen allocation to dhurrin at equal developmental stage.
- Taxon
- forage sorghumt0
- Treatment
- P-limitede0
- Outcome
- allocation of N to dhurrin in shootse0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“there was also an increase in the allocation of N to dhurrin in shoots of P-limited plants”
t0“forage sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal colonization had little effect on shoot HCNp.
- Taxon
- forage sorghumt0
- Treatment
- Colonization by AMe0
- Interactor
- AMe0symbiont
- Outcome
- shoot HCNpe0
- Direction
- little effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Colonization by AM had little effect on shoot HCNp”
t0“forage sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal colonization increased root HCNp and root nitrogen allocation to dhurrin.
- Taxon
- forage sorghumt0
- Treatment
- Colonization by AMe0
- Interactor
- AMe0symbiont
- Outcome
- root HCNp and the allocation of N to dhurrin in rootse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Colonization by AM had little effect on shoot HCNp, but increased root HCNp and the allocation of N to dhurrin in roots”
t0“forage sorghum”
The same questions in other papers
infection · molecular: metabolites · SorghumPositive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
mycorrhiza · molecular: metabolites · SorghumResults agree
7 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →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.