Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36762185›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2022

Unearthing soil-plant-microbiota crosstalk: Looking back to move forward.

Marco Giovannetti, Alessandra Salvioli di Fossalunga, Ioannis A Stringlis, Silvia Proietti, Valentina Fiorilli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Co-Inoculation Effect onPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors.

Marco GiovannettiDepartment of Biology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Alessandra Salvioli di FossalungaDepartment of Life Sciences and Systems Biology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Ioannis A StringlisPlant - Microbe Interactions, Department of Biology, Science4Life, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Silvia ProiettiDepartment of Ecological and Biological Sciences, University of Tuscia, Viterbo, Italy.
Valentina FiorilliDepartment of Life Sciences and Systems Biology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The soil is vital for life on Earth and its biodiversity. However, being a non-renewable and threatened resource, preserving soil quality is crucial to maintain a range of ecosystem services critical to ecological balances, food production and human health. In an agricultural context, soil quality is often perceived as the ability to support field production, and thus soil quality and fertility are strictly interconnected. The concept of, as well as the ways to assess, soil fertility has undergone big changes over the years. Crop performance has been historically used as an indicator for soil quality and fertility. Then, analysis of a range of physico-chemical parameters has been used to routinely assess soil quality. Today it is becoming evident that soil quality must be evaluated by combining parameters that refer both to the physico-chemical and the biological levels. However, it can be challenging to find adequate indexes for evaluating soil quality that are both predictive and easy to measure

Indexed as

microbiomeplant healthsoil databasesoil indicatorssoil-microbe-plant systemsoil quality

Identifiers

PMID36762185
PMCPMC9902496

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.