Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 109 of the 109 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Integrating microbial ecology into ecosystem models: challenges and priorities

Open access
Treseder, Kathleen K., Balser, Teri C., Bradford, Mark A., Brodie, Eoin L., Dubinsky, Eric A., Eviner, Valerie T., Hofmockel, Kirsten S., Lennon, Jay T., Levine, Uri Y., MacGregor, Barbara J., Pett-Ridge, Jennifer, Waldrop, Mark P.·2012·Biogeochemistry

Abstract

Microbial communities can potentially mediate feedbacks between global change and ecosystem function, owing to their sensitivity to environmental change and their control over critical biogeochemical processes. Numerous ecosystem models have been developed to predict global change effects, but most do not consider microbial mechanisms in detail. In this idea paper, we examine the extent to which incorporation of microbial ecology into ecosystem models improves predictions of carbon (C) dynamics under warming, changes in precipitation regime, and anthropogenic nitrogen (N) enrichment. We focus on three cases in which this approach might be especially valuable: temporal dynamics in microbial responses to environmental change, variation in ecological function within microbial communities, and N effects on microbial activity. Four microbially-based models have addressed these scenarios. In each case, predictions of the microbial-based models differ—sometimes substantially—from comparable conventional models. However, validation and parameterization of model performance is challenging. We recommend that the development of microbial-based models must occur in conjunction with the development of theoretical frameworks that predict the temporal responses of microbial communities, the phylogenetic distribution of microbial functions, and the response of microbes to N enrichment.

Overview

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/s10533-011-9636-5

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 109 references

Cited by

See all 256

Metadata

Authors
Treseder, K. K., Balser, T. C., Bradford, M. A., Brodie, E. L., Dubinsky, E. A., Eviner, V. T., Hofmockel, K. S., Lennon, J. T., Levine, U. Y., MacGregor, B. J., Pett-Ridge, J., & Waldrop, M. P.
Venue
Biogeochemistry
Published
2011-09-03
Volume
109
Issue
1-3
Pages
7-18
ISSN
  • 0168-2563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-515X
OpenAlex
W2102018547
Cited by
256
References
109
FWCI
27.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Integrating microbial ecology into ecosystem models: challenges and priorities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10533-011-9636-5
The paper
Treseder, K. K., Balser, T. C., Bradford, M. A., Brodie, E. L., Dubinsky, E. A., Eviner, V. T., Hofmockel, K. S., Lennon, J. T., Levine, U. Y., MacGregor, B. J., Pett-Ridge, J., & Waldrop, M. P. (2012). Integrating microbial ecology into ecosystem models: challenges and priorities. Biogeochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-011-9636-5

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.