ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Molecular Monitoring in Soil Bioremediation: From Genetic Potential to Verified Pathway Operation.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decision-grade digital twins forFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Diagnosing soil bioremediation failure: evidence-weighted pathways from mechanism to field closure.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Harnessing plant microbiomes to enhance crop resilience and restore war-affected soils in Ukraine.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Bioaugmentation as microbiome engineering: a framework for evaluating functional performance, persistence, and safety.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequence-based tools have greatly improved the molecular description of soil bioremediation, but detection alone cannot confirm that a contaminant is being degraded by a defined pathway. In soils, bioavailability limitations, redox microsites, relic DNA, gene mobility, and community restructuring can decouple gene presence from reaction flux. This review synthesizes an operational framework that separates three inferential levels: pathway potential, in situ activity, and verified pathway operation. The framework links inoculant fate, functional gene abundance, gene expression, pathway reconstruction, stable isotope probing, and targeted chemical analysis under explicit quality assurance, quality control, and decision rules. Particular attention is given to distinguishing parent compound loss from mineralization and detoxification and to using isotopic attribution when functional redundancy or inoculant-native overlap obscures agency. Instead of being presented as conceptually new, these principles are organized into a practical workflow for soil systems. This structure clarifies what can be discerned from genes, transcripts, proteins, metabolites, and transformation products at each evidentiary tier and provides a conservative basis for integrating multi-omics with mechanistic and quantitative interpretation.
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.