ArticleThe ISME journal2018
What intrinsic and extrinsic factors explain the stoichiometric diversity of aquatic heterotrophic bacteria?
Article in The ISME journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiology, fast and slow: bacterial response to variable resource stoichiometry and dilution rate.mSystems · 2024Article
- Consistent stoichiometric long-term relationships between nutrients and chlorophyll-a across shallow lakes.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Advances in Catchment Science, Hydrochemistry, and Aquatic Ecology Enabled by High-Frequency Water Quality Measurements.Environmental science & technology · 2023Review
- Revisiting the growth rate hypothesis: Towards a holistic stoichiometric understanding of growth.Ecology letters · 2022Review
- Influent carbon to phosphorus ratio drives the selection of PHA-storing organisms in a single CSTR.Water research X · 2022Article
- Geographical Variability of Mineral Elements and Stability of Restrictive Mineral Elements in Terrestrial Cyanobacteria Across Gradients of Climate, Soil, and Atmospheric Wet Deposition Mineral Concentration.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The elemental content of microbial communities is dependent upon the physiology of constituent populations, yet ecological stoichiometry has made slow progress toward identifying predictors of how species and strains change the elemental content of their biomass in response to the stoichiometry of elements in resources. We asked whether the elemental content of aquatic bacteria, especially flexibility in elemental content, could be predicted by their phylogeny, maximum growth rate or lake productivity. We examined 137 isolates using chemostats and found that strains differed substantially in how the carbon:nitrogen:phosphorus ratios (C:N:P) in their biomass responded to P-sufficient and P-limiting conditions. The median strain increased its biomass C:N:P from 68:14:1 to 164:25:1 under P limitation. Patterns in elemental content and ratios were partly explained by phylogeny, yet flexibility in elemental content showed no phylogenetic signal. The growth rate hypothesis predicts that P content is positively related to growth rate, but we found weak correlation between maximum growth rate and P content among the strains. Overall, isolates from highly productive lakes had higher maximum growth rates and less flexible biomass N:P than isolates from unproductive lakes. These results show that bacteria present within lake communities exhibit diverse strategies for responding to elemental imbalance.
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.