Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26832206›Full record

ArticleFEMS microbiology ecology2016

Bridging the divide: a model-data approach to Polar and Alpine microbiology.

James A Bradley, Alexandre M Anesio, Sandra Arndt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in FEMS microbiology ecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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.

James A BradleyBristol Glaciology Centre, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, BS8 1SS, UK BRIDGE, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, BS8 1SS, UK j.bradley@bristol.ac.uk.
Alexandre M AnesioBristol Glaciology Centre, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, BS8 1SS, UK.
Sandra ArndtBRIDGE, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, BS8 1SS, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in microbial ecology in the cryosphere continue to be driven by empirical approaches including field sampling and laboratory-based analyses. Although mathematical models are commonly used to investigate the physical dynamics of Polar and Alpine regions, they are rarely applied in microbial studies. Yet integrating modelling approaches with ongoing observational and laboratory-based work is ideally suited to Polar and Alpine microbial ecosystems given their harsh environmental and biogeochemical characteristics, simple trophic structures, distinct seasonality, often difficult accessibility, geographical expansiveness and susceptibility to accelerated climate changes. In this opinion paper, we explain how mathematical modelling ideally complements field and laboratory-based analyses. We thus argue that mathematical modelling is a powerful tool for the investigation of these extreme environments and that fully integrated, interdisciplinary model-data approaches could help the Polar and Alpine microbiology community address some of the great research challenges of the 21st century (e.g. assessing global significance and response to climate change). However, a better integration of field and laboratory work with model design and calibration/validation, as well as a stronger focus on quantitative information is required to advance models that can be used to make predictions and upscale processes and fluxes beyond what can be captured by observations alone.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalClimate ChangeEcosystemEnvironmentSoil Microbiologyinterdisciplinary approachmodel-data integrationmodelsPolar and Alpine microbiologyquantitative methods

Identifiers

PMID26832206
PMCPMC4765003

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.