Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28169988›Full record

ArticleThe ISME journal2017

Chemolithotrophic processes in the bacterial communities on the surface of mineral-enriched biochars.

Jun Ye, Stephen D Joseph, Mukan Ji, Shaun Nielsen, David R G Mitchell, Scott Donne, Joseph Horvat, Jianli Wang, Paul Munroe, Torsten Thomas

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ISME journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 159 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Comparison of microbial communities in unleached and leached ionic rare earth mines.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Measures for Controlling Gaseous Emissions during Composting: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jun YeCentre for Marine Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Stephen D JosephSchool of Materials Science and Engineering, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mukan JiSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Shaun NielsenCentre for Marine Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
David R G MitchellAustralian Institute of Innovative Materials, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Scott DonneSchool of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Joseph HorvatInstitute for Superconducting and Electronic Materials, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Jianli WangInstitute for Superconducting and Electronic Materials, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Paul MunroeSchool of Materials Science and Engineering, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Torsten ThomasCentre for Marine Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUUniversity of Wollongong · AUMaterials Science & Engineering · AUNanjing Agricultural University · CNUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biochar and mineral-enriched biochar (MEB) have been used as soil amendments to improve soil fertility, sequester carbon and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Such beneficial outcomes could be partially mediated by soil bacteria, however little is known about how they directly interact with biochar or MEB. We therefore analyzed the diversity and functions of bacterial communities on the surfaces of one biochar and two different MEBs after a 140-day incubation in soil. The results show that the biochar and the MEBs harbor distinct bacterial communities to the bulk soil. Communities on biochar and MEBs were dominated by a novel Gammaproteobacterium. Genome reconstruction combined with electron microscopy and high-resolution elemental analysis revealed that the bacterium generates energy from the oxidation of iron that is present on the surface. Two other bacteria belonging to the genus Thiobacillus and a novel group within the Oxalbacteraceae were enriched only on the MEBs and they had the genetic capacity for thiosulfate oxidation. All three surface-enriched bacteria also had the capacity to fix carbon dioxide, either in a potentially strictly autotrophic or mixotrophic manner. Our results show the dominance of chemolithotrophic processes on the surface of biochar and MEB that can contribute to carbon sequestration in soil.

Indexed as

CharcoalChemoautotrophic GrowthSoil MicrobiologyBacteriaCarbon SequestrationGammaproteobacteriaMineralsOxalobacteraceaeSoilThiobacillusbiocharCharcoalMineralsSoil

Identifiers

PMID28169988
PMCPMC5437921
OpenAlexW2586644632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.