ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2009
Molecular biological detection and quantification of novel Fibrobacter populations in freshwater lakes.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A guide to the natural history of freshwater lake bacteria.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2011Pooled it
- Prokaryotic assemblages in the maritime Antarctic Lake Limnopolar (Byers Peninsula, South Shetland Islands).Extremophiles : life under extreme conditions · 2017Article
- Prokaryotic community structure and respiration during long-term incubations.MicrobiologyOpen · 2012Article
- Importance of Micromonospora spp. as colonizers of cellulose in freshwater lakes as demonstrated by quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR of 16S rRNA.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2012Article
- The Fibrobacteres: an important phylum of cellulose-degrading bacteria.Microbial ecology · 2012Review
- Article
- Composition of the landfill microbial community as determined by application of domain- and group-specific 16S and 18S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PCR and quantitative PCR (qPCR) primers targeting the 16S rRNA gene were used to detect and quantify members of the genus Fibrobacter in lake water, sediment and colonized cotton taken from two freshwater lakes. Phylogenetic analysis identified two groups of sequences; those clustered with Fibrobacter succinogenes, the type species, and a defined cluster of clones loosely associated with several Fibrobacter sequences observed previously in clone libraries from freshwater environments. 16S rRNA gene sequences recovered in the same way from soil samples and ovine feces in the surrounding land were all F. succinogenes and did not include any from this group of the "freshwater" Fibrobacteres. In all cases, nested PCR was required to detect Fibrobacter 16S rRNA genes, and qPCR analysis of reverse transcribed bacterial community RNA confirmed their very low relative abundance on colonized cotton baits in the water column (at 0, 3, 7, 11, and 13 m) and on the sediment surface (<0.02% of total bacterial rRNA). However, in Esthwaite Water sediment itself, the relative abundance of fibrobacters was 2 orders of magnitude higher (ca. 1% of total bacterial rRNA). The presence of fibrobacters, including the cellulolytic rumen species F. succinogenes, on colonized cellulose samples and in lake sediment suggests that these organisms may contribute to the primary degradation of plant and algal biomass in freshwater lake ecosystems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.