ArticleMicrobial ecology2017
Development of Soil Bacterial Communities in Volcanic Ash Microcosms in a Range of Climates.
Article in Microbial ecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physicochemical Properties and Bioreactivity of Sub-10 μm Geogenic Particles: Comparison of Volcanic Ash and Desert Dust.GeoHealth · 2025Article
- First Report ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Bacterial Community with Plant Growth-Promoting Potential Associated to Pioneer Plants from an Active Mexican Volcanic Complex.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Metagenomic analysis reveals rapid development of soil biota on fresh volcanic ash.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Biodeterioration of Pompeian mural paintings: fungal colonization favoured by the presence of volcanic material residues.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is considerable interest in understanding the processes of microbial development in volcanic ash. We tested the predictions that there would be (1) a distinctive bacterial community associated with soil development on volcanic ash, including groups previously implicated in weathering studies; (2) a slower increase in bacterial abundance and soil C and N accumulation in cooler climates; and (3) a distinct communities developing on the same substrate in different climates. We set up an experiment, taking freshly fallen, sterilized volcanic ash from Sakurajima volcano, Japan. Pots of ash were positioned in multiple locations, with mean annual temperature (MAT) ranging from 18.6 to -3 °C. Within 12 months, bacteria were detectable by qPCR in all pots. By 24 months, bacterial copy numbers had increased by 10-100 times relative to a year before. C and N content approximately doubled between 12 and 24 months. HiSeq and MiSeq sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene revealed a distinctive bacterial community, different from developed vegetated soils in the same areas, for example in containing an abundance of unclassified bacterial groups. Community composition also differed between the ash pots at different sites, while showing no pattern in relation to MAT. Contrary to our predictions, the bacterial abundance did not show any relation to MAT. It also did not correlate to pH or N, and only C was statistically significant. It appears that bacterial community development on volcanic ash can be a rapid process not closely sensitive to temperature, involving distinct communities from developed soils.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27734114What 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.