Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35712047›Full record

ReviewSoil biology & biochemistry2022

From diversity to complexity: Microbial networks in soils.

Ksenia Guseva, Sean Darcy, Eva Simon, Lauren V Alteio, Alicia Montesinos-Navarro, Christina Kaiser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Soil biology & biochemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing 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

85 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 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

6 authors.

Ksenia GusevaCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Sean DarcyCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Eva SimonCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Lauren V AlteioCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Alicia Montesinos-NavarroCentro de Investigaciones sobre Desertificación (CIDE, CSIC-UV-GV), Carretera de Moncada-Náquera Km 4.5, 46113, Moncada, Valencia, Spain.
Christina KaiserCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Network analysis has been used for many years in ecological research to analyze organismal associations, for example in food webs, plant-plant or plant-animal interactions. Although network analysis is widely applied in microbial ecology, only recently has it entered the realms of soil microbial ecology, shown by a rapid rise in studies applying co-occurrence analysis to soil microbial communities. While this application offers great potential for deeper insights into the ecological structure of soil microbial ecosystems, it also brings new challenges related to the specific characteristics of soil datasets and the type of ecological questions that can be addressed. In this Perspectives Paper we assess the challenges of applying network analysis to soil microbial ecology due to the small-scale heterogeneity of the soil environment and the nature of soil microbial datasets. We review the different approaches of network construction that are commonly applied to soil microbial datasets and discuss their features and limitations. Using a test dataset of microbial communities from two depths of a forest soil, we demonstrate how different experimental designs and network constructing algorithms affect the structure of the resulting networks, and how this in turn may influence ecological conclusions. We will also reveal how assumptions of the construction method, methods of preparing the dataset, and definitions of thresholds affect the network structure. Finally, we discuss the particular questions in soil microbial ecology that can be approached by analyzing and interpreting specific network properties. Targeting these network properties in a meaningful way will allow applying this technique not in merely descriptive, but in hypothesis-driven research. Analysing microbial networks in soils opens a window to a better understanding of the complexity of microbial communities. However, this approach is unfortunately often used to draw conclusions which are far beyond the scientific evidence it can provide, which has damaged its reputation for soil microbial analysis. In this Perspectives Paper, we would like to sharpen the view for the real potential of microbial co-occurrence analysis in soils, and at the same time raise awareness regarding its limitations and the many ways how it can be misused or misinterpreted.

Indexed as

Co-occurrence networksEcological networksMicrobial community structureMicrobial network analysisSoil microbial ecology

Identifiers

PMID35712047
PMCPMC9125165

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.