ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026
Vegetation restoration restructures soil sulfur allocation and sulfur-cycling functional potential in the Mu Us Sandy Land.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vegetation restoration in semi-arid sandy ecosystems can alter soil sulfur cycling not only through changes in sulfur stocks, but also through shifts in the partitioning between organic sulfur and sulfate and their microbial regulation. Here, we investigated soil sulfur pool allocation and sulfur-cycling functional potential along a five-stage vegetation restoration gradient in the Mu Us Sandy Land by integrating sulfur fraction measurements with metagenomic analyses. Vegetation restoration markedly reshaped the soil physicochemical and microbial context, as reflected by lower pH and higher TN, microbial biomass carbon, and enzyme activity in restored soils. In contrast, sulfur pools responded asynchronously: total sulfur and organic sulfur declined substantially from bare sandy land to restored vegetation types, whereas sulfate showed a weaker and comparatively more stable response. At the functional level, dominant sulfur-cycling genes were generally more abundant in bare sandy land, declined across restored vegetation types, and showed only partial recovery in forestland, indicating that restoration reorganized sulfur-cycling functional composition rather than uniformly enhancing sulfur-cycling potential. Taxonomically, dominant sulfur-cycling genes were consistently affiliated mainly with
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.