Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27669159›Full record

ArticlePloS one

Using a Control to Better Understand Phyllosphere Microbiota.

Andrea R Ottesen, Sasha Gorham, Elizabeth Reed, Michael J Newell, Padmini Ramachandran, Travis Canida, Marc Allard, Peter Evans, Eric Brown, James Robert White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Horsenettle (PeerJ · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Andrea R OttesenMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6425-7943
Sasha GorhamMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.
Elizabeth ReedMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.
Michael J NewellWye Research and Education Center, University of Maryland, Queenstown, Maryland, United States of America.
Padmini RamachandranMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.
Travis CanidaMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.
Marc AllardMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.
Peter EvansFood Safety and Inspection Service, USDA, Washington D. C., United States of America.
Eric BrownMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.
James Robert WhiteMolecular Methods and Subtyping Branch, Division of Microbiology, Office of Regulatory Science, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, College Park, Maryland, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An important data gap in our understanding of the phyllosphere surrounds the origin of the many microbes described as phyllosphere communities. Most sampling in phyllosphere research has focused on the collection of microbiota without the use of a control, so the opportunity to determine which taxa are actually driven by the biology and physiology of plants as opposed to introduced by environmental forces has yet to be fully realized. To address this data gap, we used plastic plants as inanimate controls adjacent to live tomato plants (phyllosphere) in the field with the hope of distinguishing between bacterial microbiota that may be endemic to plants as opposed to introduced by environmental forces. Using 16S rRNA gene amplicons to study bacterial membership at four time points, we found that the vast majority of all species-level operational taxonomic units were shared at all time-points. Very few taxa were unique to phyllosphere samples. A higher taxonomic diversity was consistently observed in the control samples. The high level of shared taxonomy suggests that environmental forces likely play a very important role in the introduction of microbes to plant surfaces. The observation that very few taxa were unique to the plants compared to the number that were unique to controls was surprising and further suggests that a subset of environmentally introduced taxa thrive on plants. This finding has important implications for improving our approach to the description of core phytobiomes as well as potentially helping us better understand how foodborne pathogens may become associated with plant surfaces.

Identifiers

PMID27669159
PMCPMC5036865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.