ArticleMicroorganisms2024
Soil Microorganism Interactions under Biological Fumigations Compared with Chemical Fumigation.
Article in Microorganisms, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBiological fumigation, a potential alternative to chemical fumigation, shows a wide range of prospective applications. In this study, we carried out biological fumigation experiments to evaluate its effect on alleviating consecutive cropping problems (CRPs) when compared with chemical fumigation.
methodsWe designed five treatments, namely, CR (no treatment), LN (chemical fumigation with lime nitrogen), Ta (fumigation with marigold), Ra (fumigation with radish), and Br (fumigation with mustard), for soils for replanting eggplant and measured the crop's growth status, soil bacterial and fungal communities, and soil physicochemical properties.
resultsThe results showed that the Br and Ra treatments formed similar microbial communities, while the Ta treatment formed unique microbial communities. The genera Olpidiomycota and Rozellomycota could be used as indicator species for the transformation process of soil microbial communities after the Br and Ta treatments, respectively. When compared with the CR and LN treatments, the soil's physicochemical properties were optimized under the Br treatment, and the soil organic matter content increased by 64.26% and 79.22%, respectively. Moreover, under the Br treatment, the soil's biological properties enhanced the bacterial and fungal alpha diversity, and the saprotrophic fungi increased with the depletion of pathotrophic fungi, while some specific probiotic microorganisms (such as Olpidiomycota, Microascales,
conclusionsAmong these three biological fumigation methods, the Br pre-treatment was the best way to alleviate the crop's CRPs and may be a good substitute for chemical fumigation in some situations. However, the Ta treatment also had some risks, such as the loss of land quality and reduced productivity.
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.