Cited by 540Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions

Microbial indicators for soil quality

Open access
Schloter, Michael, Nannipieri, Paolo, Sørensen, Søren J., van Elsas, Jan Dirk·2018·Biology and Fertility of Soils

Abstract

The living soil is instrumental to key life support functions (LSF) that safeguard life on Earth. The soil microbiome has a main role as a driver of these LSF. Current global developments, like anthropogenic threats to soil (e.g., via intensive agriculture) and climate change, pose a burden on soil functioning. Therefore, it is important to dispose of robust indicators that report on the nature of deleterious changes and thus soil quality. There has been a long debate on the best selection of biological indicators (bioindicators) that report on soil quality. Such indicators should ideally describe organisms with key functions in the system, or with key regulatory/connecting roles (so-called keystone species ). However, in the light of the huge functional redundancy in most soil microbiomes, finding specific keystone markers is not a trivial task. The current rapid development of molecular (DNA-based) methods that facilitate deciphering microbiomes with respect to key functions will enable the development of improved criteria by which molecular information can be tuned to yield molecular markers of soil LSF. This review critically examines the current state-of-the-art in molecular marker development and recommends avenues to come to improved future marker systems.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00374-017-1248-3

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A large proportion of soil organisms remains to be characterized in taxonomic and functional terms.

    “since a large proportion of soil organisms yet remains to be characterized in taxonomic and functional terms (Schloter et al., 2018; Bouchez et al., 2016).”

    From Soil quality – A critical review (2018) · cites this paper as Schloter et al., 2018

    In “The soil microbiome—an ignored majority” (page unavailable), the paper says that efforts to characterize the soil microbiome in depth have been hindered by its complexity. In “Soil microbiome functions that drive nitrogen transformations” (page unavailable), it also says that knowledge of some organisms and their genes is lacking. These passages support the point for soil microorganisms, but not its extension to soil organisms generally. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The analysis of the 'big data' generated with sequencing poses a serious challenge in terms of time, computing capacities and interpretation.

    “The analysis of the ' big data ' generated with sequencing also poses a serious challenge in terms of time, computing capacities and interpretation”

    From Soil quality – A critical review (2018) · cites this paper as Schloter et al., 2018

    In “The soil microbiome—an ignored majority” (page not provided), the paper says sequencing generates “big data” that challenge bioinformatics analysis. “Brave new world” also notes interpretational pitfalls for high-throughput sequencing. The cited passages do not specify analysis time or computing-capacity demands; their reference to time concerns sampling, not data analysis. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Dini-Andreote F, Olff H, Van Elsas JD, Salles JF (2017) Metagenomics of microbiomes across a soil formation gradient. ISME J (in press)
  2. Emmerling C, Schloter M, Hartmann A, Kandeler E (2002) Functional diversity of soil organisms-a review of recent research activities in Germany. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 165:408-420
  3. Prosser JI (2012) Nitrification. In: Huang PM, Li Y, Summer M (eds) Handbook of soil sciences. properties and processes, second Edition. Soil Biology and Biochemistry: soil biology in its second age Paul EA, Nannipieri P (Eds). CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 27.19- 27.
  4. Van Elsas JD, Jansson JK, Trevors JT (2007) Modern Soil Microbiology II. CRC Press, Boca Raton

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schloter, M., Nannipieri, P., Sørensen, S. J., & van Elsas, J. D.
Affiliations
  • Helmholtz Munich (DE)
  • University of Florence (IT)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Venue
Biology and Fertility of Soils
Published
2017-10-16
Volume
54
Issue
1
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 0178-2762 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0789
OpenAlex
W2765364657
Cited by
540
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 79 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 16 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
36.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biology and Fertility of Soils (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Groningen
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Keywords
soil quality, bioindicators, soil microbiome, keystone species, functional redundancy, molecular markers, soil functions, DNA-based methods, anthropogenic soil disturbance, climate change impacts on soil

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