Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26733959›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2015

Volatiles in Inter-Specific Bacterial Interactions.

Olaf Tyc, Hans Zweers, Wietse de Boer, Paolina Garbeva

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Role of anti-Applied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. NovelBiotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Quorum sensing gene regulation inFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  20. Biocontrol of fungal phytopathogens byFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Olaf TycDepartment of Microbial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of EcologyWageningen, Netherlands; Department of Soil Quality, Wageningen University and Research CentreWageningen, Netherlands.
Hans ZweersDepartment of Microbial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology Wageningen, Netherlands.
Wietse de BoerDepartment of Microbial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of EcologyWageningen, Netherlands; Department of Soil Quality, Wageningen University and Research CentreWageningen, Netherlands.
Paolina GarbevaDepartment of Microbial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology Wageningen, Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute of Ecology · NLWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of volatile organic compounds for functioning of microbes is receiving increased research attention. However, to date very little is known on how inter-specific bacterial interactions effect volatiles production as most studies have been focused on volatiles produced by monocultures of well-described bacterial genera. In this study we aimed to understand how inter-specific bacterial interactions affect the composition, production and activity of volatiles. Four phylogenetically different bacterial species namely: Chryseobacterium, Dyella, Janthinobacterium, and Tsukamurella were selected. Earlier results had shown that pairwise combinations of these bacteria induced antimicrobial activity in agar media whereas this was not the case for monocultures. In the current study, we examined if these observations were also reflected by the production of antimicrobial volatiles. Thus, the identity and antimicrobial activity of volatiles produced by the bacteria were determined in monoculture as well in pairwise combinations. Antimicrobial activity of the volatiles was assessed against fungal, oomycetal, and bacterial model organisms. Our results revealed that inter-specific bacterial interactions affected volatiles blend composition. Fungi and oomycetes showed high sensitivity to bacterial volatiles whereas the effect of volatiles on bacteria varied between no effects, growth inhibition to growth promotion depending on the volatile blend composition. In total 35 volatile compounds were detected most of which were sulfur-containing compounds. Two commonly produced sulfur-containing volatile compounds (dimethyl disulfide and dimethyl trisulfide) were tested for their effect on three target bacteria. Here, we display the importance of inter-specific interactions on bacterial volatiles production and their antimicrobial activities.

Indexed as

ChryseobacteriumDyellainter-specific interactionsJanthinobacteriumsoil bacteriaTsukamurellavolatile activitiesvolatolomics

Identifiers

PMID26733959
PMCPMC4683202
OpenAlexW2228864708

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.