Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23840414›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Ascomycota members dominate fungal communities during straw residue decomposition in arable soil.

Anzhou Ma, Xuliang Zhuang, Junmei Wu, Mengmeng Cui, Di Lv, Chunzhao Liu, Guoqiang Zhuang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Reducing the proportion ofFrontiers in plant science · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anzhou MaResearch Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, PR China.
Xuliang Zhuang
Junmei Wu
Mengmeng Cui
Di Lv
Chunzhao Liu
Guoqiang Zhuang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated the development of fungal community composition in arable soil during the degradation of straw residue. We explored the short-term responses of the fungal community over 28 days of decomposition in soil using culture-independent polymerase chain reaction in combination with a clone library and denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). Fungal cellobiohydrolase I (cbhI) genes in the soil were also characterized, and their diversity suggested the existence of a different cellulose decomposer. The DGGE profiles based on fungal internal transcribed spacer analysis showed different successions of fungal populations during residue decomposition. Members of Lecythophora and Sordariales were dominant in the early succession, while Hypocrea and Engyodontium were better adapted in the late succession. The succession of fungal communities might be related to changes of residue quality during decomposition. Collectively, sequences assigned to Ascomycota members were dominant at different stages of the fungal succession during decomposition, revealing that they were key drivers responsible for residue degradation in the arable soil tested.

Indexed as

AscomycotaBiodiversityCellulose 1,4-beta-CellobiosidaseDenaturing Gradient Gel ElectrophoresisDNA, FungalDNA, Ribosomal SpacerFungal ProteinsGenetic MarkersMolecular Sequence DataMolecular TypingMycological Typing TechniquesOryzaPhylogenySequence Analysis, DNASoil MicrobiologyCellulose 1,4-beta-CellobiosidaseDNA, FungalDNA, Ribosomal SpacerFungal ProteinsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID23840414
PMCPMC3688710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.