Feather-Induced Enrichment of Onygenales Triggers Cross-Kingdom Functional Shifts in Soil Fungal Communities
Abstract
As typical urban green spaces with high human activity, hospital green soils not only serve as important microbial reservoirs but may also be associated with potential ecological impacts and public-health concerns. However, the ecological distribution patterns and potential pathogenic functional responses of keratinophilic fungi in these soils remain poorly understood. In this study, green space soils from hospitals in 30 cities across 10 provinces in southern China were examined. Using a feather enrichment treatment combined with Illumina MiSeq high-throughput sequencing, the effects of feather addition (simulating exogenous keratin inputs) on fungal community composition, diversity, and function were analyzed. The results revealed that feather enrichment significantly altered fungal community structure. The relative abundance of Ascomycota increased from 50.74% (control) to 97.19% (treatment group), with Onygenales becoming the dominant fungal order (93.72%), indicating a substantial community shift. Additionally, alpha diversity of the soil fungal community decreased. Functionally, the Pathotroph-Saprotroph trophic mode was significantly enriched, and Plant Pathogen-Undefined Saprotroph emerged as the dominant functional guild. Soil pH and carbon-to-nitrogen ratio (C/N) were identified as key environmental factors associated with community shifts, exhibiting strong negative correlations with both Onygenales and the Pathotroph-Saprotroph functional mode (P < 0.01). This study demonstrates that feather enrichment imposes keratin-based selective pressure, specifically enriching keratinophilic fungal taxa while reshaping soil fungal structure and function. These findings deepen our understanding of how keratin-rich inputs reshape fungal communities in hospital green spaces and provide important insights for the ecological risk assessment of soil microbial communities.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 44
- Authors
- Zhang, C., Qu, H., Wang, H., Lu, Y., Li, X., Ran, Q., Dong, C., Zhang, Y., & Han, Y.
- Affiliations
- Guizhou University (CN)
- Guizhou Education University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Han, Yanfeng
- Venue
- Current Microbiology
- Published
- 2026-02-18
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 188-188
- ISSN
- 0343-8651 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-0991
- OpenAlex
- W7130343685
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 44
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Current Microbiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.32160007, 32260003, 32060011)
- “Hundred” Talent Projects of Guizhou Province (Qian Ke He [2020] 6005)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
- Keywords
- Onygenales, keratinophilic fungi, soil fungal communities, fungal community structure, fungal functional groups, soil pH, C/N ratio, fungal diversity, environmental risk assessment
- MeSH terms
- Mycobiome, Animals, China, Feathers, Fungi, Keratins, Soil, Soil Microbiology, Onygenales, Biodiversity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review