Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30103819›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2018

Resilience of the resident soil microbiome to organic and inorganic amendment disturbances and to temporary bacterial invasion.

Késia Silva Lourenço, Afnan K A Suleiman, A Pijl, J A van Veen, H Cantarella, E E Kuramae

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Towards sustainable agriculture: rhizosphere microbiome engineering.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Késia Silva LourençoMicrobial Ecology Department, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Afnan K A SuleimanMicrobial Ecology Department, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
A PijlMicrobial Ecology Department, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
J A van VeenMicrobial Ecology Department, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
H CantarellaSoils and Environmental Resources Center, Agronomic Institute of Campinas (IAC), Av. Barão de Itapura 1481, Campinas, SP, 13020-902, Brazil.
E E KuramaeMicrobial Ecology Department, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands. E.Kuramae@nioo.knaw.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-6701-8668

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVinasse, a by-product of sugarcane ethanol production, is recycled by sugarcane plantations as a fertilizer due to its rich nutrient content. However, the impacts of the chemical and microbial composition of vinasse on soil microbiome dynamics are unknown. Here, we evaluate the recovery of the native soil microbiome after multiple disturbances caused by the application of organic vinasse residue, inorganic nitrogen, or a combination of both during the sugarcane crop-growing season (389 days). Additionally, we evaluated the resistance of the resident soil microbial community to the vinasse microbiome.

resultsVinasse applied alone or 30 days prior to N resulted in similar changes in the soil microbial community. Furthermore, the impact of the application of vinasse together with N fertilizer on the soil microbial community differed from that of N fertilizer alone. Organic vinasse is a source of microbes, nutrients, and organic matter, and the combination of these factors drove the changes in the resident soil microbial community. However, these changes were restricted to a short period of time due to the capacity of the soil community to recover. The invasive bacteria present in the vinasse microbiome were unable to survive in the soil conditions and disappeared after 31 days, with the exception of the Acetobacteraceae (native in the soil) and Lactobacillaceae families.

conclusionOur analysis showed that the resident soil microbial community was not resistant to vinasse and inorganic N application but was highly resilient.

Indexed as

BacteriaDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalMetagenomicsNitrogenRecyclingRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSaccharumSoil MicrobiologySolid WasteDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalNitrogenRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSolid WasteMicrobial ecologyMineral fertilizerSeasonal variationSugarcaneSustainabilityVinasse

Identifiers

PMID30103819
PMCPMC6090642

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.