ArticleBMC plant biology2026
Contrasting responses of two Camellia oleifera rootstocks differing in phosphorus efficiency to low-phosphorus stress.
Article in BMC plant biology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCamellia oleifera Abel, the dominant woody oil crop of southern China, often suffers from limited productivity due to the prevalence of phosphorus (P) stress in acidic soils. While grafting is an effective strategy to mitigate nutrient scarcity, the mechanistic basis of rootstock-mediated P tolerance in this species remains poorly understood. This study investigated the morphological, physiological, and molecular responses of two contrasting C. oleifera rootstocks, the P-tolerant Ganwu 1 (GW1) and the P-sensitive Ganwu 2 (GW2) under P-deficient conditions.
resultsOur findings identified rootstock types as the primary determinant of P tolerance. GW1 exhibited superior resilience by re-engineering its root architecture, achieving a 4.12-fold higher root biomass and significantly greater 66.5% increase in fine root volume than GW2 under low P stress. In contrast, GW2 showed a compensatory but inefficient root expansion that failed to enhance soil exploration. Specifically, GW1 demonstrated a 3.7-fold higher root P accumulation and a 52.4% increase in root P-utilization efficiency under stress, reflecting a significantly higher capacity for P acquisition and internal allocation. This was coupled with enhanced nutrient rebalancing, particularly through robust potassium (K) accumulation in shoots, whereas GW2 suffered from a significant decline in soluble protein content and higher lipid peroxidation (MDA). Additionally, GW1 sustained high root acid phosphatase (ACP) activity during late-stage stress to further mobilize P. At the molecular level, GW1 was characterized by the accelerated induction of the CoARF22, CoPHR1, and CoPHT1;1 and earlier activation (70 days) of CoALMT-mediated organic acid genes. These proactive responses enabled GW1 to effectively mobilize soil P and maintain structural integrity, establishing it as a highly efficient rootstock for P-limited acid soils.
conclusionsThis integrated "morphology-physiology-signaling" framework grants GW1 a superior low-P adaptive advantage. These results identify GW1 as a promising, P-efficient rootstock for sustainable C. oleifera production in P-deficient environments.
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.