Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30415428›Full record

ReviewApplied microbiology and biotechnology2019

Complete nitrification: insights into the ecophysiology of comammox Nitrospira.

Hanna Koch, Maartje A H J van Kessel, Sebastian Lücker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing 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

92 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A genomic view of Earth's biomes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Hanna KochDepartment of Microbiology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Maartje A H J van KesselDepartment of Microbiology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sebastian LückerDepartment of Microbiology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. S.luecker@science.ru.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2935-4454

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 024.002.002Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 863.14.019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nitrification, the oxidation of ammonia via nitrite to nitrate, has been considered to be a stepwise process mediated by two distinct functional groups of microorganisms. The identification of complete nitrifying Nitrospira challenged not only the paradigm of labor division in nitrification, it also raises fundamental questions regarding the environmental distribution, diversity, and ecological significance of complete nitrifiers compared to canonical nitrifying microorganisms. Recent genomic and physiological surveys identified factors controlling their ecology and niche specialization, which thus potentially regulate abundances and population dynamics of the different nitrifying guilds. This review summarizes the recently obtained insights into metabolic differences of the known nitrifiers and discusses these in light of potential functional adaptation and niche differentiation between canonical and complete nitrifiers.

Indexed as

NitrificationAmmoniaBacteriaBacterial ProteinsNitritesNitrogenPhylogenyAmmoniaBacterial ProteinsNitritesNitrogenAmmonia-oxidizing microorganismsComammoxComplete nitrificationNitrificationNitrite-oxidizing bacteriaNitrospira

Identifiers

PMID30415428
PMCPMC6311188

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.