ArticleMicrobial ecology2015
Shifts in soil chemical properties and bacterial communities responding to biotransformed dry olive residue used as organic amendment.
Article in Microbial ecology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk element sorption/desorption characteristics of dry olive residue: a technique for the potential immobilization of risk elements in contaminated soils.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016Article
- Decreased microbial diversity and Lactobacillus group in the intestine of geriatric giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca).World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2016Article
- Microbial diversity of a Mediterranean soil and its changes after biotransformed dry olive residue amendment.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dry olive residue (DOR) is a waste product derived from olive oil extraction and has been proposed as an organic amendment. However, it has been demonstrated that a pre-treatment, such as its transformation by saprophytic fungi, is required before DOR soil application. A greenhouse experiment was designed where 0 and 50 g kg(-1) of raw DOR (DOR), Coriolopsis floccosa-transformed DOR (CORDOR) and Fusarium oxysporum-transformed DOR (FUSDOR) were added to soil. Analyses of the soil chemical properties as well as the structure and relative abundance of bacterial and actinobacterial communities were conducted after 0, 30 and 60 days following amendment. The different amendments produced a slight decrease in soil pH and significant increases in carbon fractions, C/N ratios, phenols and K, with these increases being more significant after DOR application. Quantitative PCR assays of the 16S rRNA gene and PLFA analyses showed that all amendments favoured bacterial growth at 30 and 60 days, although actinobacterial proliferation was more evident after CORDOR and FUSDOR application at 60 days. Bacterial and actinobacterial DGGE multivariate analyses showed that the amendments produced structural changes in both communities, especially after 60 days of amendment. PLFA data analysis identified changes in soil microbial communities according to the amendment considered, with FUSDOR and CORDOR being less disruptive than DOR. Finally, integrated analysis of all data monitored in the present study enabled us to conclude that the greatest impact on soil properties was caused by DOR at 30 days and that soil showed some degree of resilience after this time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25501891What 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.