ArticlePlant and soil2026
Comparative assessment of root exudation in maize: Influence of experimental setup, growth conditions and root hairs.
Article in Plant and soil, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: A major challenge in root exudation research is obtaining exudates samples that accurately reflect the exudation processes under natural soil growth conditions. Both growth environment and experimental setup can significantly influence root exudation dynamics. This study investigated how different experimental systems and growth conditions affect carbon exudation in maize ( Methods: Maize plants were grown under various experimental conditions, including soil-based and hydroponic systems. Root exudates were collected using a combination of traditional and innovative sampling approaches. Carbon exudation rates were compared across experimental setups and genotypes. Laboratory results were further compared with data from a separate field experiment. Results: Exudation rates obtained from soil-based laboratory experiments were comparable to those observed in the field under similar growth temperatures. The contribution of root hairs to total carbon exudation was negligible compared to the effect of growth conditions and experimental setup. Large differences in root biomass introduced bias into exudation measurements, particularly when root to sampling volume ratio (RSVR) varied substantially. Conclusions: Experimental setup and environmental conditions have a strong influence on root exudation measurement. Soil-based laboratory systems that closely replicate field conditions, particularly temperature, can serve as reliable proxies for field experiments, providing ecologically meaningful data. Maintaining a consistent RSVR is also essential for obtaining accurate and comparable results. These findings offer important methodological guidance for reliably quantifying root carbon exudation in maize. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11104-026-08324-x.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.