ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparative soil bacterial metabarcoding after aboveground vs. subsurface decomposition of Mus musculus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Outdoor microcosms, metabarcoding with next-generation sequencing of the 16S rRNA bacterial gene, total body score (TBS) and physicochemical analyses were used to monitor Mus musculus decomposition aboveground (A) and in the subsurface (S), and compared to soil-only controls (C). As determined by MaAsLin2 analysis, significant shifts in bacterial communities at 30 cm depths within the A, S and C treatments distinguished control from experimental soils, and between aboveground and subsurface deposition, demonstrating the potential for gravesoil discrimination during the first 90 days. For example, Dokdonella (p = 0.0002), Edaphobaculum (p = 0.0004) and Lacibacter (p = 0.0034) recorded significant shifts relative to sampling time. Furthermore, Massilia (p = 0.0005), Mycobacterium (p = 0.0006) and Sandaracinus (p = 0.0007) increased in abundance for the aboveground mice treatments. This was confirmed with ANOSIM where p = 0.0082 showed statistically significant difference between the aboveground and subsurface deposition. TBS and physicochemical analyses suggested that nutrient release into the soils occurred during active decay and skin rapture on days 7-13 in the subsurface and days 13-20 aboveground, with a particular increase in soil potassium concentration on day 15. Significant differences in soil temperatures resulted between A and S vs. C microcosms, aligning with atmospheric temperature changes. In summary, complementary application of metabarcoding, total body score, exogenous and physicochemical methods for postmortem interval estimation and clandestine grave location highlighted the feasibility of using temperature records downloaded from meteorological stations and portable X-ray fluorescence as indicators for various phases of decomposition.
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.