Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37436063›Full record

ArticlemBio2023

Leaf side determines the relative importance of dispersal versus host filtering in the phyllosphere microbiome.

Wenke Smets, Mason K Chock, Corinne M Walsh, Caihong Qiu Vanderburgh, Ethan Kau, Steven E Lindow, Noah Fierer, Britt Koskella

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mBio, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Complete genome sequence ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Embracing complexity in plant-microbiome systems.Environmental microbiology reports · 2024
    Review
  20. 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

8 authors.

Wenke SmetsDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California , Berkeley, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5611-6094
Mason K ChockDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California , Berkeley, California, USA.
Corinne M WalshCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado , Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Caihong Qiu VanderburghCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado , Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Ethan KauDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California , Berkeley, California, USA.
Steven E LindowDepartment of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of California , Berkeley, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8333-6674
Noah Fierer *Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado , Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Britt Koskella *Department of Integrative Biology, University of California , Berkeley, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Leaves harbor distinct microbial communities that can have an important impact on plant health and microbial ecosystems worldwide. Nevertheless, the ecological processes that shape the composition of leaf microbial communities remain unclear, with previous studies reporting contradictory results regarding the importance of bacterial dispersal versus host selection. This discrepancy could be driven in part because leaf microbiome studies typically consider the upper and lower leaf surfaces as a single entity despite these habitats possessing considerable anatomical differences. We characterized the composition of bacterial phyllosphere communities from the upper and lower leaf surfaces across 24 plant species. Leaf surface pH and stomatal density were found to shape phyllosphere community composition, and the underside of leaves had lower richness and higher abundances of core community members than upper leaf surfaces. We found fewer endemic bacteria on the upper leaf surfaces, suggesting that dispersal is more important in shaping these communities, with host selection being a more important force in microbiome assembly on lower leaf surfaces. Our study illustrates how changing the scale in which we observe microbial communities can impact our ability to resolve and predict microbial community assembly patterns on leaf surfaces. IMPORTANCE Leaves can harbor hundreds of different bacterial species that form unique communities for every plant species. Bacterial communities on leaves are really important because they can, for example, protect their host against plant diseases. Usually, bacteria from the whole leaf are considered when trying to understand these communities; however, this study shows that the upper and lower sides of a leaf have a very different impact on how these communities are shaped. It seems that the bacteria on the lower leaf side are more closely associated with the plant host, and communities on the upper leaf side are more impacted by immigrating bacteria. This can be really important when we want to treat, for example, crops in the field with beneficial bacteria or when trying to understand host-microbe interactions on the leaves.

Indexed as

BacteriaMicrobiotaPlant LeavesPlantsleaf surfacemicrobial ecologyphyllosphere

Identifiers

PMID37436063
PMCPMC10470611

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.