ArticleScientific reports2025
Continuous cropping alters rhizosphere microbial communities and soil properties reducing Curcuma Kwangsiensis yield.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Effects of different crop intercropping on quality and rhizosphere soil microbial community ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
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
Curcuma kwangsiensis is a medicinal plant endemic to China with significant economic and medicinal value. In agricultural practice, it is typically harvested after one year of cultivation. However, continuous cropping has severely constrained the development of the C. kwangsiensis industry. To elucidate the effects of continuous cropping on the yield and rhizosphere soil environment, this study systematically investigated the effects of continuous cropping on C. kwangsiensis yield, rhizosphere soil physicochemical properties, enzyme activities, and microbial communities through field experiments. The results showed that continuous cropping significantly reduced C. kwangsiensis yield by 58.87%. It decreased soil pH while increasing the accumulation of soil nutrients including organic carbon, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total potassium, available phosphorus, available potassium, and available nitrogen, but significantly decreased the activities of soil enzymes such as phosphatase, urease and catalase. Moreover, continuous cropping enhanced both the abundance and diversity of bacterial and microeukaryotic communities. It significantly increased the relative abundance of Planctomycetota, which became the dominant bacterial phylum, while also significantly increasing the relative abundances of the predominant microeukaryotic phyla Ciliophora and Cercozoa. Redundancy analysis revealed that pH was the most important factor affecting microbial community composition. Continuous cropping of C. kwangsiensis reduced soil pH, altered soil physicochemical properties and enzyme activities, and restructured microbial communities. The bacterial co-occurrence networks revealed a shift from a relatively compact and clustered structure at the initial stage to a larger and more complex network with continuous cropping, characterized by higher interaction density but reduced local clustering. The fungal networks shifted from a highly compact structure in Y0 to more expanded but less cohesive architectures in Y1 and Y2. SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) analysis shows that during continuous cropping, soil enzyme activity was the key influencing factor, which was closely related to microbial diversity and the availability of nitrogen and phosphorus, and there was a positive feedback effect. These changes collectively explain the yield reduction in C. kwangsiensis, providing a critical theoretical foundation for protecting its rhizosphere soil ecosystem and ensuring sustainable cultivation practices.
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.