ArticleBMC plant biology2026
Geographic patterns and soil-to-bark microbial transmission shape microbiome assembly in tea trees.
Article in BMC plant biology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the ecological links in the microbiome of Camellia sinensis is vital for exploring beneficial interactions between microorganisms and economically important woody plants.
resultThis study investigates the characteristics of microbial communities, source-sink dynamics, driving factors, and functional differentiation of tea tree bark and bulk soil in the primary tea-producing regions of Yunnan, China (City of Pu'er, Lincang, and Xishuangbanna). Using amplicon sequencing, FEAST source tracking, and functional prediction, we analyzed microbial community differences and ecological roles. Findings revealed that bulk soil may served as the microbial reservoir for bark, sharing all bark bacteria and 68.09% of bark fungi in Pu'er, with minimal reverse flow. Soil harbored higher alpha diversity dominated by Chloroflexi, Acidobacteriota, and Sordariomycetes, while bark selectively enriched Gammaproteobacteria, Cyanobacteriia, and Lecanoromycetes. Plant type mainly influenced bark bacterial communities (R²=76.49%, P < 0.001), whereas geographic location significantly impacted soil bacterial composition (R²=45.72%, P < 0.001) and fungi in both bark (R²=63.06%, P < 0.001) and soil (R²=78.84%, P < 0.01). Total nitrogen (TN) and organic matter (OM) in bulk soil emerged as the predominant factors influencing community variation both for niches of soil and bark. Functional differentiation was observed, with soil microbiomes primarily engaged in chemoheterotrophy and nutrient cycling, while bark microbiomes were more involved in carbon fixation and stress resistance. LEfSe analysis identified 30 bacterial and 64 fungal biomarkers (LDA ≥ 4, P < 0.05), including Xanthobacteraceae in soil and Pleosporaceae in bark.
conclusionsThis study highlights soil's crucial role as a microbial reservoir and the impact of niche-specific factors, providing a framework to understand how microbial diversity is maintained and regulated along the Soil-Bark Continuum in tea plants.
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.