ArticleNature ecology & evolution2026
Microbial growth rate is a stronger predictor of soil organic carbon than carbon use efficiency.
Article in Nature ecology & evolution, 2026. 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.
- Discrepancies between observations and models highlight how to improve predictions.Nature ecology & evolution · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The extent to which microbial processes control soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics remains uncertain. Carbon use efficiency (CUE), that is, the fraction of assimilated carbon allocated to growth, has been used as a key parameter but its relationship with SOC reflects carbon partitioning rather than the absolute magnitude of microbial fluxes. The microbial growth rate could provide a more mechanistic link to SOC accumulation because it quantifies biomass production and reflects necromass formation. Here we combine a global ¹⁸O-H
Indexed as
Identifiers
41652003What 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.