ArticleMicroorganisms2022
Metagenomics Reveal Microbial Effects of Lotus Root-Fish Co-Culture on Nitrogen Cycling in Aquaculture Pond Sediments.
Article in Microorganisms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lotus-fish co-culture reshapes pond microbiota and improves ecological stability relative to fish monoculture.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Feed input leads to a large amount of nitrogen-containing sediment accumulating in the substrate in the pond culture process, threatening the safety of aquaculture production. Planting lotus roots (Nelumbo nucifera Gaertn.) in ponds can accelerate the removal of bottom nitrogen, while the role of nitrogen cycle-related microorganisms in the removal is still unclear. In this study, eight yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco) culture ponds with the same basic situation were divided into fishponds with planted lotus roots and ponds with only fish farming. Sediment samples were taken from the fishponds with planted lotus roots and the ponds with only fish farming before and after fish farming, marked as FPB, FPA, FOB, and FOA, respectively, and subjected to physicochemical and metagenomic sequencing analyses. The results show that the contents of NH4+, NO2−, TN, TP, and OM were significantly lower (p < 0.05) in FPA than in FOA. The abundance of metabolic pathways for inorganic nitrogen transformation and ammonia assimilation increased considerably after culture compared to the sediments before culture. A total of eight ammonia production pathways and two ammonia utilization pathways were annotated in the sediments of the experimental ponds, with a very high abundance of ammonia assimilation. Acinetobacter and Pseudomonas (34.67%, 18.02%) were the dominant bacteria in the pond sediments before culture, which changed to Thiobacillus (12.16%) after culture. The FPA had significantly higher relative abundances of Thiobacillus denitrificans and Sulfuricella denitrificans, and the FOA had significantly a higher abundance of Microcystis aeruginosa compared to other samples. The massive growth of Microcystis aeruginosa provided two new inorganic nitrogen metabolic pathways and one organic nitrogen metabolic pathway for FOA. The relative abundances of these three microorganisms were negatively correlated with NH4+ content (p < 0.01) and significantly positively correlated with AP, OM content, and pH value. Compared with ponds with only fish farming, lotus root−fish co-culture can significantly reduce the nitrogen content in sediment, increase the abundance of denitrifying bacteria, and inhibit algae growth. Still, it has little effect on the abundance of nitrogen cycle-related enzymes and genes. In summary, it is shown that, although lotus roots promote the growth of denitrifying microorganisms in the sediment, nitrogen removal relies mainly on nutrient uptake by lotus roots.
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.