Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42151453›Full record

Reviewnpj biodiversity2026

Microbial diversity as the next frontier of payments for ecosystem services in nature-positive finance.

Kohei Ito, Honami Ando, Hiroshi Honda

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in npj biodiversity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kohei ItoBIOTA Inc., Tokyo, Japan. kohei@biota.ne.jp.
Honami AndoBIOTA Inc., Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroshi HondaHonda Biotech. Laboratory, Tochigi, Japan. pe.labo.hondabio@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) have matured across forests (carbon), watersheds (water quality and quantity), agricultural landscapes (biodiversity), and urban stormwater management. Most biodiversity assessments emphasize insects, fish, and birds. By contrast, schemes that directly measure and reward the microbial diversity, the foundations of ecosystem services in soils, aquatic systems, and urban green spaces, remain scarce. Meanwhile, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework calls for mobilizing at least USD 200 billion per year by 2030, and the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund has launched; but current flows into PES are limited, and PES explicitly targeting microbes is largely uncharted. This Perspective argues that microbially focused PES is rare and, even when they exist, they tend to be biased toward specific pathogens or pollution indicators. However, measurement, reporting, and verification of various microorganisms are operationally feasible and methods to strengthen source attribution and contribution estimation are now mature; and channeling a share of Nature-Positive finance to microbial ecosystem assessments could jointly advance drinking-water safety, soil health, agricultural resilience, and urban public health. We discuss the importance of microbial-PES in conserving and enhancing ecosystem services.

Identifiers

PMID42151453
PMCPMC13590658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.