Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32229362›Full record

ArticleChemosphere2020

Investigating the mycobiome of the Holcomb Creosote Superfund Site.

Lauren M Czaplicki, Lauren K Redfern, Ellen M Cooper, P Lee Ferguson, Rytas Vilgalys, Claudia K Gunsch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chemosphere, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Lauren M CzaplickiPratt School of Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27713, USA.
Lauren K RedfernPratt School of Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27713, USA.
Ellen M CooperNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27713, USA.
P Lee FergusonNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27713, USA.
Rytas VilgalysDepartment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27713, USA.
Claudia K GunschPratt School of Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27713, USA. Electronic address: ckgunsch@duke.edu.

Funding

Zebrafish as a Detector of Organophosphate ExposureP42ES010356 · NIEHS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI AMY H HERRING · 2000 to 2026
$56.2M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES010356
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even though many fungi are known to degrade a range of organic chemicals and may be advantageous for targeting hydrophobic chemicals with low bioavailability due to their ability to secrete extracellular enzymes, fungi are not commonly leveraged in the context of bioremediation. Here we sought to examine the fungal microbiome (mycobiome) at a model creosote polluted site to determine if fungi were prevalent under high PAH contamination conditions as well as to identify potential mycostimulation targets. Several significant positive associations were detected between OTUs and mid-to high-molecular weight PAHs. Several OTUs were closely related to taxa that have previously been identified in culture-based studies as PAH degraders. In particular, members belonging to the Ascomycota phylum were the most diverse at higher PAH concentrations suggesting this phylum may be promising biostimulation targets. There were nearly three times more positive correlations as compared to negative correlations, suggesting that creosote-tolerance is more common than creosote-sensitivity in the fungal community. Future work including shotgun metagenomic analysis would help confirm the presence of specific degradation genes. Overall this study suggests that mycobiome and bacterial microbiome analyses should be performed in parallel to devise the most optimal in situ biostimulation treatment strategies.

Indexed as

Hazardous Waste SitesMycobiomeSoil MicrobiologyAscomycotaBacteriaBiodegradation, EnvironmentalCreosoteMicrobiotaPolycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsSoil PollutantsCreosotePolycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsSoil PollutantsBioremediationBiostimulationCreosoteModel polluted siteMycobiomeMycoremediationPAHs

Identifiers

PMID32229362
PMCPMC7242165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.