ArticleFrontiers in microbiomes2025
Effects of biopolymers, cork, and
Article in Frontiers in microbiomes, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Soil microorganisms play a crucial role in plant development, while biopolymers, such as cork and Extracellular Polymeric Substances/Exopolysaccharides (EPS), can enhance soil health. However, these amendments may affect DNA extraction and microbial analysis, necessitating the validation of the extraction method before conducting next-generation sequencing (NGS). Methods: This study evaluated 48 soil samples from Decatur, Alabama (Silt loam) that underwent four treatments: unamended soil (soil.control), soil with cork (soil.cork), soil with EPS (soil.EPS), and soil with both cork and EPS (soil.cork.EPS). Samples were collected at four time intervals (0-, 24-, 48-, and 72-hours post-treatment), with three biological replicates for each treatment. The FastDNA Spin Kit proved the most effective among the six DNA extraction methods tested. Results and discussion: Amplicon sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene identified 62,996 amplicon sequence variants (ASVs), with 513 ASVs shared across all time points and 467 ASVs shared among the different treatments. The microbial community was primarily composed of
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.