ArticlemSphere2026
Differential assembly and functional roles of bacterial communities in coniferous and mixed conifer-broadleaf forest soils.
Article in mSphere, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Forest soils harbor a diverse array of bacteria that play a crucial role in nutrient cycling. However, the differential effects of coniferous versus mixed conifer-broadleaf forests on the distribution of both abundant and rare bacterial taxa remain poorly understood. In this study, we integrated 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing with metagenomic shotgun sequencing to conduct a comparative analysis of soil bacterial communities in a conifer plantation and an adjacent mixed conifer-broadleaf forest, specifically examining their community structure, assembly mechanisms, co-occurrence networks, and functional potential. Both abundant and rare taxa showed significant differences in community composition between the two forest types. Soil pH and organic matter content significantly influenced the total and abundant bacterial communities, while available phosphorus and potassium were key determinants of rare community composition. Co-occurrence network analysis revealed that abundant communities formed highly clustered, simplified networks, contrasting with more fragmented and keystone-rich networks in rare communities. Null model analyses indicated that community assembly was largely driven by stochastic processes, with ecological drift accounting for about 80% of the variation in total and rare communities, and dispersal limitation explaining nearly 72% of the variation in abundant communities. Functional predictions indicated that bacterial communities in mixed forests were enriched in pathways linked to glycosylation, carbohydrate degradation, and nitrogen fixation, while coniferous forests favored pathways related to autophagy, signaling, and stress responses. This study highlights the complementary roles of abundant and rare bacterial taxa in forest soil ecosystems and underscores the importance of preserving mixed forests to sustain microbial functional diversity.IMPORTANCEForest soils host a complex web of common and rare bacteria that quietly regulate nutrient cycles. By comparing pure conifer stands with mixed conifer-broadleaf forests, we found that abundant species underpin essential functions while rarer microbes fill specialized niches. Acidity and nutrients strongly influence which bacteria thrive; mixed stands favored microbes that break down carbohydrates and fix nitrogen, whereas conifer soils supported organisms adapted to stress and nutrient-poor conditions. These findings emphasize the importance of preserving diverse forest ecosystems for soil health, carbon storage, and effective forest management strategies in climate change adaptation.
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.