Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24271163›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2014

Planctomycetes in lakes: poor or strong competitors for phosphorus?

Thomas Pollet, Jean-François Humbert, Rémy D Tadonléké

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Microorganisms · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

3 authors.

Thomas PolletINRA-UMR CARRTEL 42, Thonon-les-Bains, France.
Jean-François Humbert
Rémy D Tadonléké

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experiments were conducted with water samples from two perialpine lakes with differing eutrophication status in order to examine the effects of inorganic-nutrient amendments (nitrogen as NO3(-) or NH4(+) and phosphorus as PO4(3-)) on the dynamics, structure, and composition of Planctomycetes and to test the hypothesis that the community structure of Planctomycetes members and that of the other bacteria (without Planctomycetes, here referred to as bacteria-wP, the most represented groups within the community) would be similarly impacted by nutrient additions. Initial samples were characterized by high total nitrogen-to-total phosphorus ratios (range, 39 to 55), suggesting P rather than N was the limiting nutrient for microbial communities. Consistent with this, P additions stimulated phytoplankton growth and affected the community structure of bacteria-wP but, surprisingly, not that of Planctomycetes. N additions did not significantly affect the community structures of bacteria-wP and Planctomycetes or the Planctomycetes phylotype composition. The estimated generation time of Planctomycetes was 123 h. These findings could suggest that the generally well-accepted statement that bacteria (as a whole) are superior to phytoplankton in the ability to obtain phosphorus under P limitation might actually not hold for Planctomycetes. Planctomycetes might be poor competitors for P that do not respond quickly to the nutrient supply, which may help explain why their abundance is low in aquatic systems. The alternative view that Planctomycetes could be strong competitors for P (storing it) is also discussed. Our findings highlight the need for further studies examining Planctomycetes-phosphorus relationships in aquatic ecosystems.

Indexed as

BiotaBacteriaDNA, BacterialFranceLakesMolecular Sequence DataNitrogenPhosphorusSequence Analysis, DNADNA, BacterialNitrogenPhosphorus

Identifiers

PMID24271163
PMCPMC3911188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.