SynthesisPloS one2020
Biological invasions alter environmental microbiomes: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wavyleaf basketgrass (mSphere · 2026Article
- Double Trouble: Aquatic Invasive Plants Can Promote Mosquitoes.Ecology letters · 2025Article
- Ecological and evolutionary responses of earthworm holobionts to environmental changes.The ISME journal · 2025Review
- Host-level biodiversity shapes the dynamics and networks within the coral reef microbiome.ISME communications · 2025Article
- From Alien Species to Alien Communities: Host- and Habitat-Associated Microbiomes in an Alien Amphibian.Microbial ecology · 2023Article
- Shift and homogenization of gut microbiome during invasion in marine fishes.Animal microbiome · 2022Article
- Microbiome of the Successful Freshwater Invader, the Signal Crayfish, and Its Changes along the Invasion Range.Microbiology spectrum · 2021Article
- Microbiome of the wasp Vespula pensylvanica in native and invasive populations, and associations with Moku virus.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biological invasions impact both agricultural and natural systems. The damage can be quantified in terms of both economic loss and reduction of biodiversity. Although the literature is quite rich about the impact of invasive species on plant and animal communities, their impact on environmental microbiomes is underexplored. Here, we re-analyze publicly available data using a common framework to create a global synthesis of the effects of biological invasions on environmental microbial communities. Our findings suggest that non-native species are responsible for the loss of microbial diversity and shifts in the structure of microbial populations. Therefore, the impact of biological invasions on native ecosystems might be more pervasive than previously thought, influencing both macro- and micro-biomes. We also identified gaps in the literature which encourage research on a wider variety of environments and invaders, and the influence of invaders across seasons and geographical ranges.
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.