Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25502754›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Succession of bacterial community structure and diversity in soil along a chronosequence of reclamation and re-vegetation on coal mine spoils in China.

Yuanyuan Li, Hongyu Wen, Longqian Chen, Tingting Yin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Reforestation ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Effects of Land Reclamation on Soil Bacterial Community and Potential Functions in Bauxite Mining Area.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Yuanyuan LiJiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China.
Hongyu WenSchool of Life Science, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, China.
Longqian ChenJiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China; Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Tingting YinSchool of Life Science, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The growing concern about the effectiveness of reclamation strategies has motivated the evaluation of soil properties following reclamation. Recovery of belowground microbial community is important for reclamation success, however, the response of soil bacterial communities to reclamation has not been well understood. In this study, PCR-based 454 pyrosequencing was applied to compare bacterial communities in undisturbed soils with those in reclaimed soils using chronosequences ranging in time following reclamation from 1 to 20 year. Bacteria from the Proteobacteria, Chloroflexi, Actinobacteria, Acidobacteria, Planctomycetes and Bacteroidetes were abundant in all soils, while the composition of predominant phyla differed greatly across all sites. Long-term reclamation strongly affected microbial community structure and diversity. Initial effects of reclamation resulted in significant declines in bacterial diversity indices in younger reclaimed sites (1, 8-year-old) compared to the undisturbed site. However, bacterial diversity indices tended to be higher in older reclaimed sites (15, 20-year-old) as recovery time increased, and were more similar to predisturbance levels nearly 20 years after reclamation. Bacterial communities are highly responsive to soil physicochemical properties (pH, soil organic matter, Total N and P), in terms of both their diversity and community composition. Our results suggest that the response of soil microorganisms to reclamation is likely governed by soil characteristics and, indirectly, by the effects of vegetation restoration. Mixture sowing of gramineae and leguminosae herbage largely promoted soil geochemical conditions and bacterial diversity that recovered to those of undisturbed soil, representing an adequate solution for soil remediation and sustainable utilization for agriculture. These results confirm the positive impacts of reclamation and vegetation restoration on soil microbial diversity and suggest that the most important phase of microbial community recovery occurs between 15 and 20 years after reclamation.

Indexed as

BiodiversityPhylogenySoil MicrobiologyChinaCoalDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16SCoalDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID25502754
PMCPMC4263735

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.