ArticleScientific reports2021
Insufficient sampling constrains our characterization of plant microbiomes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sampling Design and Sample Processing Affect Soil Biodiversity Assessments.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Response of cbbL Carbon-Sequestering Microorganisms to Simulated Warming in the River Source Wetland of the Wayan Mountains.Biology · 2025Article
- Tomato defences modulate not only insect performance but also their gut microbial composition.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Comprehensive Insight of Current and Future Challenges in Large-Scale Soil Microbiome Analyses.Microbial ecology · 2023Review
- Bioprospecting and Challenges of Plant Microbiome Research for Sustainable Agriculture, a Review on Soybean Endophytic Bacteria.Microbial ecology · 2023Review
- Temporary establishment of bacteria from indoor plant leaves and soil on human skin.Environmental microbiome · 2022Article
- Acquisition and evolution of enhanced mutualism-an underappreciated mechanism for invasive success?The ISME journal · 2022Article
- Limited effect of thermal pruning on wild blueberry crop and its root-associated microbiota.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- The Emerging Role of Decellularized Plant-Based Scaffolds as a New Biomaterial.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Plants host diverse microbial communities, but there is little consensus on how we sample these communities, and this has unknown consequences. Using root and leaf tissue from showy milkweed (Asclepias speciosa), we compared two common sampling strategies: (1) homogenizing after subsampling (30 mg), and (2) homogenizing bulk tissue before subsampling (30 mg). We targeted bacteria, arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi and non-AM fungi in roots, and foliar fungal endophytes (FFE) in leaves. We further extracted DNA from all of the leaf tissue collected to determine the extent of undersampling of FFE, and sampled FFE twice across the season using strategy one to assess temporal dynamics. All microbial groups except AM fungi differed in composition between the two sampling strategies. Community overlap increased when rare taxa were removed, but FFE and bacterial communities still differed between strategies, with largely non-overlapping communities within individual plants. Increasing the extraction mass 10 × increased FFE richness ~ 10 ×, confirming the severe undersampling indicated in the sampling comparisons. Still, seasonal patterns in FFEs were apparent, suggesting that strong drivers are identified despite severe undersampling. Our findings highlight that current sampling practices poorly characterize many microbial groups, and increased sampling intensity is necessary for increase reproducibility and to identify subtler patterns in microbial distributions.
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.