ArticlePloS one2022
Soil microbiome disruption reveals specific and general plant-bacterial relationships in three agroecosystem soils.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The root exudates of wild tomato compared to a modern variety maintain elevated soluble soil phosphorus by interacting with rhizosphere microbiota.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Linking Soil Microbial Diversity to Nitrogen and Phosphorus Dynamics.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- The native soil microbiome is critical for early root-associated microbiota assembly and canola growth.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- Does the flavonoid quercetin influence the generalist-selective nature of mycorrhizal interactions in invasive and non-invasive native woody plants?Mycorrhiza · 2025Article
- Agricultural Practices and Environmental Factors Drive Microbial Communities in the Mezcal-Producing Agave angustifolia Haw.Microbial ecology · 2025Article
- Effect of intra- and inter-specific plant interactions on the rhizosphere microbiome of a single target plant at different densities.PloS one · 2025Article
- The effect of crop-rotation systems in regenerative agricultural environments on the rhizosphere microbiome of dry-land winter wheat.Sustainable microbiology · 2025Article
- Advancing time-since-interval estimation for clandestine graves: a forensic ecogenomics perspective into burial and translocation timelines using massively parallel sequencing.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Biodegradable hydrogels and microbial consortia as a treatment for soil dysbiosis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Balancing the scales: assessing the impact of irrigation and pathogen burden on potato blackleg disease and soil microbial communities.Microbiome · 2024Article
- Metabolome-driven microbiome assembly determining the health of ginger crop (Zingiber officinale L. Roscoe) against rhizome rot.Microbiome · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Shifts of the soil microbiome composition induced by plant-plant interactions under increasing cover crop densities and diversities.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Microbiological Approach to Alleviate Soil Replant Syndrome in Peaches.Microorganisms · 2023Article
- Microbiome structure variation and soybean's defense responses during flooding stress and elevated COFrontiers in plant science · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Soil microbiome disruption methods are regularly used to reduce populations of microbial pathogens, often resulting in increased crop growth. However, little is known about the effect of soil microbiome disruption on non-pathogenic members of the soil microbiome. Here, we applied soil microbiome disruption in the form of moist-heat sterilization (autoclaving) to reduce populations of naturally occurring soil microbiota. The disruption was applied to analyze bacterial community rearrangement mediated by four crops (corn, beet, lettuce, and tomato) grown in three historically distinct agroecosystem soils (conventional, organic, and diseased). Applying the soil disruption enhanced plant influence on rhizosphere bacterial colonization, and significantly different bacterial communities were detected between the tested crops. Furthermore, bacterial genera showed significant abundance increases in ways both unique-to and shared-by each tested crop. As an example, corn uniquely promoted abundances of Pseudomonas and Sporocytophaga, regardless of the disrupted soil in which it was grown. Whereas the promotion of Bosea, Dyadobacter and Luteoliobacter was shared by all four crops when grown in disrupted soils. In summary, soil disruption followed by crop introduction amplified the plant colonization of potential beneficial bacterial genera in the rhizosphere.
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.