Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27798702›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

The Role of Microbial Community Composition in Controlling Soil Respiration Responses to Temperature.

Marc D Auffret, Kristiina Karhu, Amit Khachane, Jennifer A J Dungait, Fiona Fraser, David W Hopkins, Philip A Wookey, Brajesh K Singh, Thomas E Freitag, Iain P Hartley and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The QScientific reports · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Marc D AuffretUniversity of Aberdeen, Cruickshank Building St Machar Drive, Aberdeen AB24 3UU, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2321-8219
Kristiina KarhuUniversity of Exeter Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter EX4 4RJ, United Kingdom.
Amit KhachaneHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, University of Western Sydney, Penrith 2751 NSW, Australia.
Jennifer A J DungaitSustainable Soils and Grassland Systems Department, Rothamsted Research North Wyke, Okehampton, EX20 2SB, United Kingdom.
Fiona FraserSchool of Energy, Environment and Agrifood, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire, MK43 0AL, United Kingdom.
David W HopkinsThe Royal Agricultural University, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, GL7 6JS, United Kingdom.
Philip A WookeyInstitute of Life & Earth Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, United Kingdom.
Brajesh K SinghHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, University of Western Sydney, Penrith 2751 NSW, Australia.
Thomas E FreitagThe James Hutton Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen AB15 8QH, United Kingdom.
Iain P HartleyUniversity of Exeter Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter EX4 4RJ, United Kingdom.
James I ProsserUniversity of Aberdeen, Cruickshank Building St Machar Drive, Aberdeen AB24 3UU, United Kingdom.
University of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Exeter · GBWestern Sydney University · AUCranfield University · GBHeriot-Watt University · GBJames Hutton Institute · GBRothamsted Research · GBRoyal Agricultural University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rising global temperatures may increase the rates of soil organic matter decomposition by heterotrophic microorganisms, potentially accelerating climate change further by releasing additional carbon dioxide (CO2) to the atmosphere. However, the possibility that microbial community responses to prolonged warming may modify the temperature sensitivity of soil respiration creates large uncertainty in the strength of this positive feedback. Both compensatory responses (decreasing temperature sensitivity of soil respiration in the long-term) and enhancing responses (increasing temperature sensitivity) have been reported, but the mechanisms underlying these responses are poorly understood. In this study, microbial biomass, community structure and the activities of dehydrogenase and β-glucosidase enzymes were determined for 18 soils that had previously demonstrated either no response or varying magnitude of enhancing or compensatory responses of temperature sensitivity of heterotrophic microbial respiration to prolonged cooling. The soil cooling approach, in contrast to warming experiments, discriminates between microbial community responses and the consequences of substrate depletion, by minimising changes in substrate availability. The initial microbial community composition, determined by molecular analysis of soils showing contrasting respiration responses to cooling, provided evidence that the magnitude of enhancing responses was partly related to microbial community composition. There was also evidence that higher relative abundance of saprophytic Basidiomycota may explain the compensatory response observed in one soil, but neither microbial biomass nor enzymatic capacity were significantly affected by cooling. Our findings emphasise the key importance of soil microbial community responses for feedbacks to global change, but also highlight important areas where our understanding remains limited.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaTemperatureBiomassCell RespirationFumigationLinear ModelsSequence Analysis, DNASoilTime FactorsSoil

Identifiers

PMID27798702
PMCPMC5087920
OpenAlexW2539889046

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.