Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35783398›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2022

Effect of No Tillage System on Soil Fungal Community Structure of Cropland in Mollisol: A Case Study.

Ming Gao, Haiyu Li, Meng Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

3 authors.

Ming GaoNortheast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Harbin, China.
Haiyu LiNortheast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Harbin, China.
Meng LiNortheast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Harbin, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conservation tillage is generally regarded as a sustainable farming system for the future. The fungal community structure has a strong response to conservation tillage. However, how the conservation tillage system affects the soil fungal community structure is little known. Using the high-throughput sequencing technology, the soil fungal community was explored under no tillage (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) in Northeast China Mollisol. The copy number of fungal genes in NT20 was significantly lower than that in other treatments. NT changed the composition of soil fungal communities at the taxonomic level of phylum and genus. The diversity indices of the soil fungal community in no tillage at soil depths of 0-5 cm (NT5) were significantly higher than those in soil depths of 5-20 cm (NT20). The fungal community under NT and CT could form a good cluster distribution and NT5, conventional tillage at soil depths of 0-5 cm (CT5) and 5-20 cm (CT20) had specific indicator species. Most of the potential pathogens were significantly higher in NT5 than in NT20. Tillage and soil depth could explain 64% of the diversity and 95% of the composition of the fungal community, which indirectly changed the diversity and composition of fungi by using soil organic carbon, pH value, and soil bulk density. Furthermore, soil organic carbon (SOC) best explained the soil fungal community, followed by soil pH. The study indicated that the NT system had a comprehensive effect on the soil fungal community and SOC is the most crucial factor in determining this community.

Indexed as

conservation tillagediversityfungipathogensSEMsoil organic carbon

Identifiers

PMID35783398
PMCPMC9244396

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.