ArticlePLoS biology2025
Breaking the reproducibility barrier with standardized protocols for plant-microbiome research.
Article in PLoS biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microbiota assembly inmSystems · 2026Article
- From Traditional to Omics-Driven: Emerging Strategies for Isolation, Cultivation, and Identification of Plant Endophytes.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Metabolic blueprints of monocultures enable prediction and design of synthetic microbial consortia.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Fluid-Derived Organoids from Pleural Effusion and Ascites: Emerging Models for Drug Resistance and Personalized Oncology.Journal of Cancer · 2026Review
- Biohacking the human gut microbiome for precision health and therapeutic innovation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Bacterial fitness for plant colonization is influenced by plant growth substrate.The New phytologist · 2025Article
- EcoBOT: an AI/ML enabled automated phenotyping capability for model plants.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Inter-laboratory replicability is crucial yet challenging in microbiome research. Leveraging microbiomes to promote soil health and plant growth requires understanding underlying molecular mechanisms using reproducible experimental systems. In a global collaborative effort involving five laboratories, we aimed to help advance reproducibility in microbiome studies by testing our ability to replicate synthetic community assembly experiments. Our study compared fabricated ecosystems constructed using two different synthetic bacterial communities, the model grass Brachypodium distachyon, and sterile EcoFAB 2.0 devices. All participating laboratories observed consistent inoculum-dependent changes in plant phenotype, root exudate composition, and final bacterial community structure, where Paraburkholderia sp. OAS925 could dramatically shift microbiome composition. Comparative genomics and exudate utilization linked the pH-dependent colonization ability of Paraburkholderia, which was further confirmed with motility assays. The study provides detailed protocols, benchmarking datasets, and best practices to help advance replicable science and inform future multi-laboratory reproducibility studies.
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.