ArticlePloS one2016
Quantifying the Sensitivity of Soil Microbial Communities to Silver Sulfide Nanoparticles Using Metagenome Sequencing.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining Site-Specific Water Quality Guidelines for Marine Microbiomes under Contaminant Stress.Environmental science & technology · 2025Article
- Engineered Nanomaterials in Soil: Their Impact on Soil Microbiome and Plant Health.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- The influence of wasabi on the gut microbiota of high-carbohydrate, high-fat diet-induced hypertensive Wistar rats.Journal of human hypertension · 2021Article
- Article
- The effects of silver nanoparticles on the microbial nitrogen cycle: a review of the known risks.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Review
- Advances in monitoring soil microbial community dynamic and function.Journal of applied genetics · 2020Review
- Concentration-dependent responses of soil bacterial, fungal and nitrifying communities to silver nano and micron particles.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
- Intestinal microbiome of broiler chickens after use of nanoparticles and metal salts.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
- Nanoparticles in the environment: where do we come from, where do we go to?Environmental sciences Europe · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Soils are a sink for sulfidised-silver nanoparticles (Ag2S-NPs), yet there are limited ecotoxicity data for their effects on microbial communities. Conventional toxicity tests typically target a single test species or function, which does not reflect the broader community response. Using a combination of quantitative PCR, 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing and species sensitivity distribution (SSD) methods, we have developed a new approach to calculate silver-based NP toxicity thresholds (HCx, hazardous concentrations) that are protective of specific members (operational taxonomic units, OTUs) of the soil microbial community. At the HC20 (80% of species protected), soil OTUs were significantly less sensitive to Ag2S-NPs compared to AgNPs and Ag+ (5.9, 1.4 and 1.4 mg Ag kg-1, respectively). However at more conservative HC values, there were no significant differences. These trends in OTU responses matched with those seen in a specific microbial function (rate of nitrification) and amoA-bacteria gene abundance. This study provides a novel molecular-based framework for quantifying the effect of a toxicant on whole soil microbial communities while still determining sensitive genera/species. Methods and results described here provide a benchmark for microbial community ecotoxicological studies and we recommend that future revisions of Soil Quality Guidelines for AgNPs and other such toxicants consider this approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.