Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31619759›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Bacterial, archaeal and micro-eukaryotic communities characterize a disease-suppressive or conducive soil and a cultivar resistant or susceptible to common scab.

Jan Kopecky, Zuzana Samkova, Ensyeh Sarikhani, Martina Kyselková, Marek Omelka, Vaclav Kristufek, Jiri Divis, Geneviève G Grundmann, Yvan Moënne-Loccoz, Marketa Sagova-Mareckova

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Disease-Suppressive Soils-Beyond Food Production: a Critical Review.Journal of soil science and plant nutrition · 2021
    Review
  9. 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 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Jan KopeckyCrop Research Institute, Epidemiology and Ecology of Microorganisms, Drnovská 509, 161 06, Prague 6, Czech Republic.
Zuzana SamkovaCrop Research Institute, Epidemiology and Ecology of Microorganisms, Drnovská 509, 161 06, Prague 6, Czech Republic.
Ensyeh SarikhaniCrop Research Institute, Epidemiology and Ecology of Microorganisms, Drnovská 509, 161 06, Prague 6, Czech Republic.
Martina KyselkováBiology Centre of the Czech Academy of Sciences, v. v. i., Institute of Soil Biology, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Marek OmelkaFaculty of Mathematics and Physics, Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics, Charles University, Sokolovská 83, 186 75, Prague 8, Czech Republic.
Vaclav KristufekBiology Centre of the Czech Academy of Sciences, v. v. i., Institute of Soil Biology, Na Sádkách 7, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Jiri DivisFaculty of Agriculture, University of South Bohemia, Studentská 13, 370 05, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Geneviève G GrundmannUniv Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS, INRA, VetAgro Sup, UMR5557 Ecologie Microbienne, F-69622, Villeurbanne, France.
Yvan Moënne-LoccozUniv Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS, INRA, VetAgro Sup, UMR5557 Ecologie Microbienne, F-69622, Villeurbanne, France.
Marketa Sagova-MareckovaCrop Research Institute, Epidemiology and Ecology of Microorganisms, Drnovská 509, 161 06, Prague 6, Czech Republic. sagova@vurv.cz.
Crop Research Institute · CZCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCharles University · CZCzech Academy of Sciences, Biology Centre · CZCzech University of Life Sciences Prague · CZInstitute of Soil Biology · CZUniversity of South Bohemia in České Budějovice · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Control of common scab disease can be reached by resistant cultivars or suppressive soils. Both mechanisms are likely to translate into particular potato microbiome profiles, but the relative importance of each is not known. Here, microbiomes of bulk and tuberosphere soil and of potato periderm were studied in one resistant and one susceptible cultivar grown in a conducive and a suppressive field. Disease severity was suppressed similarly by both means yet, the copy numbers of txtB gene (coding for a pathogenicity determinant) were similar in both soils but higher in periderms of the susceptible cultivar from conducive soil. Illumina sequencing of 16S rRNA genes for bacteria (completed by 16S rRNA microarray approach) and archaea, and of 18S rRNA genes for micro-eukarytes showed that in bacteria, the more important was the effect of cultivar and diversity decreased from resistant cultivar to bulk soil to susceptible cultivar. The major changes occurred in proportions of Actinobacteria, Chloroflexi, and Proteobacteria. In archaea and micro-eukaryotes, differences were primarily due to the suppressive and conducive soil. The effect of soil suppressiveness × cultivar resistance depended on the microbial community considered, but differed also with respect to soil and plant nutrient contents particularly in N, S and Fe.

Indexed as

Soil MicrobiologyActinobacteriaArchaeaChloroflexiCrops, AgriculturalDisease ResistanceDisease SusceptibilityEukaryotic CellsGenotyping TechniquesIronMicrobiotaNitrogenPlant DiseasesProteobacteriaRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 18SIronNitrogenRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 18SSulfurVirulence Factors

Identifiers

PMID31619759
PMCPMC6796001
OpenAlexW2980362002

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.