Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 409

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microbial carbon use efficiency: accounting for population, community, and ecosystem-scale controls over the fate of metabolized organic matter

Open access
Geyer, Kevin M., Kyker-Snowman, Emily, Grandy, A. Stuart, Frey, Serita D.·2016·Biogeochemistry
DOI 10.1007/s10533-016-0191-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Microbial carbon use efficiency (CUE) is a critical regulator of soil organic matter dynamics and terrestrial carbon fluxes, with strong implications for soil biogeochemistry models. While ecologists increasingly appreciate the importance of CUE, its core concepts remain ambiguous: terminology is inconsistent and confusing, methods capture variable temporal and spatial scales, and the significance of many fundamental drivers remains inconclusive. Here we outline the processes underlying microbial efficiency and propose a conceptual framework that structures the definition of CUE according to increasingly broad temporal and spatial drivers where (1) CUE P reflects population-scale carbon use efficiency of microbes governed by species-specific metabolic and thermodynamic constraints, (2) CUE C defines community-scale microbial efficiency as gross biomass production per unit substrate taken up over short time scales, largely excluding recycling of microbial necromass and exudates, and (3) CUE E reflects the ecosystem-scale efficiency of net microbial biomass production (growth) per unit substrate taken up as iterative breakdown and recycling of microbial products occurs. CUEE integrates all internal and extracellular constraints on CUE and hence embodies an ecosystem perspective that fully captures all drivers of microbial biomass synthesis and decay. These three definitions are distinct yet complementary, capturing the capacity for carbon storage in microbial biomass across different ecological scales. By unifying the existing concepts and terminology underlying microbial efficiency, our framework enhances data interpretation and theoretical advances.

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/s10533-016-0191-y

Cites

80 of 80 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 80 references

Cited by

See all 409

Metadata

Authors
Geyer, K. M., Kyker-Snowman, E., Grandy, A. S., & Frey, S. D.
Venue
Biogeochemistry
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-02
Volume
127
Issue
2-3
Pages
173-188
ISSN
  • 0168-2563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-515X
DOI
10.1007/s10533-016-0191-y
OpenAlex
W2265460792
Cited by
409
References
80
FWCI
33.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Microbial carbon use efficiency: accounting for population, community, and ecosystem-scale controls over the fate of metabolized organic matter. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10533-016-0191-y
The paper
Geyer, K. M., Kyker-Snowman, E., Grandy, A. S., & Frey, S. D. (2016). Microbial carbon use efficiency: accounting for population, community, and ecosystem-scale controls over the fate of metabolized organic matter. Biogeochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-016-0191-y

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.