ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026
Contrasting ecological responses of abundant and rare bacterial and fungal subcommunities along an alpine marsh wetland degradation gradient.
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
Introduction: Abundant and rare microbial taxa may respond differently to wetland degradation, yet their relative contributions to community reorganization remain poorly resolved in alpine marsh wetlands. Methods: We investigated lightly (LD), moderately (MD), and severely degraded (SD) alpine marsh wetlands on the northern shore of Qinghai Lake using 15 soil metagenomes and nine soil physicochemical properties. Bacterial and fungal genera were classified as abundant, intermediate, rare, or low-prevalence taxa according to domain-specific prevalence and mean relative abundance. Sample-level richness and original abundance contributions, alpha and beta diversity, community composition, distribution breadth, candidate indicator genera, and environmental associations were compared across the degradation gradient. Results: Total detected bacterial richness declined from 346.2 genera per sample in LD to 287.0 in SD. The rare bacterial share of detected richness decreased from 45.3% to 40.4%, while its original abundance contribution decreased from 6.79% to 3.70%. Abundant fungi accounted for 97.1-98.5% of total fungal abundance. Rare bacterial richness declined monotonically with degradation, whereas Shannon diversity, Simpson diversity, and Pielou's evenness declined in abundant fungi. All four focal subcommunities differed significantly in composition among degradation levels, with the largest PERMANOVA effect observed for abundant fungi and the smallest for rare fungi. Rare fractions exhibited greater incidence-based beta diversity and narrower observed distributions than abundant fractions. Soil PC1 and PC2 were associated with 51.6%, 41.4%, and 55.1% of the variation in abundant bacterial, rare bacterial, and abundant fungal communities, respectively, but with only 0.6% of the variation in rare fungal communities. Discussion: Partitioning microbial communities into abundant and rare fractions revealed pronounced abundance- and domain-dependent reorganization along the wetland degradation gradient. Rare bacteria showed marked losses in richness and abundance contribution, whereas abundant fungi exhibited stronger declines in within-community diversity and greater environmental structuring. These contrasting responses were obscured in whole-community summaries, highlighting the value of explicitly separating abundant and rare taxa when evaluating microbial responses to alpine marsh wetland degradation.
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.