ArticleBMC microbiology2025
Analysis of soil microbial community structure changes in the drainage field of the Shengli coalfield based on high-throughput sequencing.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2025. 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
backgroundThe study of soil environment in drainage fields is important for environmental management and ecological restoration, and there is currently a knowledge gap in understanding the impact of soil microbial communities in the Shengli coalfield drainage fields and the corresponding ecological effects. To investigate the changes in rhizosphere soil microbial communities of different dominant plants after years of restoration, this study examines the improvement effects of different dominant plants on the soil environment.
resultsThis study is based on high-throughput sequencing to restore the slope of coal mine spoil after 15 years as the sampling site. The rhizosphere soil of five dominant plants was selected for microbial community analysis, and functional prediction of the microbial community was conducted. The dominant plants selected included Erect Milkvetch (Astragalus adsurgens), Lemongrass (Caragana korshinskii), Alfalfa (Medicago sativa), Phyllanthus pinnatifida (Elymus dahuricus), and Brassica Rapa (Brassica campestris). The results showed that after 15 years of restoration, the soil physicochemical properties in the Phyllanthus pinnatifida group were better than those in the other groups overall, but some of them were inferior to those in the lemon-stripped mallard group. Abundant saprophytic fungal communities were found in different dominant plant groups, mainly belonging to the phyla Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, resulting in significantly higher organic matter content in the dominant plant groups compared to the CK group. The bacterial communities were dominated by the phyla Actinobacteriota, Proteobacteria, Chloroflexi, and Firmicutes. Among these microbial phyla, the Phyllanthus pinnatifida group had higher abundance, which is beneficial for vegetation colonization. Redundancy analysis showed that soil pH was significantly correlated with microbial communities. Organic matter content and pH are the main factors influencing the composition of soil microbial communities, significantly affecting the composition of microorganisms in different groups. After years of restoration, the environment of the Shengli Coalfield's spoil heap has been greatly improved.
conclusionsThe planting of various beneficial plants has resulted in significant improvements to the soil microbial community and physicochemical properties, with Phyllanthus pinnatifida having the most positive impact. This lays the foundation for the subsequent restoration of the slope of the spoil heap.
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.