Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 169

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impacts of heavy metal contamination and phytoremediation on a microbial community during a twelve-month microcosm experiment

Open access
Gremion, Fabienne, Chatzinotas, Antonis, Kaufmann, Karin, Sigler, William, Harms, Hauke·2004·FEMS Microbiology Ecology

Abstract

The effects of heavy metals and phytoextraction practices on a soil microbial community were studied during 12 months using a hyperaccumulating plant (Thlaspi caerulescens) grown in an artificially contaminated soil. The 16S ribosomal RNA genes of the Bacteria and the beta-Proteobacteria and the amoA gene (encoding the alpha-subunit of ammonia monooxygenase) were PCR-amplified and analysed by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). Principal component analysis (PCA) of the DGGE data revealed that: (i) the heavy metals had the most drastic effects on the bacterial groups targeted, (ii) the plant induced changes which could be observed in the amoA and in the Bacteria 16S rRNA gene patterns, (iii) the changes observed during 12 months in the DGGE-patterns of the planted contaminated soil did not indicate recovery of the initial bacterial community present in the non-contaminated soil. The potential function of the microbial community was assessed recording community level physiological profiles (CLPP) and analysing them by PCA. The lower capability of the bacterial community to degrade the substrates provided in the BIOLOG plates, in particular the amino acids, amides and amines, as well as a delay in the average well colour development (AWCD) differentiated the bacterial community of the contaminated samples from that of the non-contaminated ones. However, the plant had a positive effect on substrate utilization as shown by the greater number of substrates used in all planted samples compared to unplanted ones. Finally, the measurement of the potential ammonia oxidation indicated that ammonia oxidising bacteria were completely inhibited in the contaminated soil. The stimulation of ammonia oxidation by the plant observed in the non-contaminated samples was surpassed by the inhibitory effect of the heavy metals in the contaminated soil. This study emphasises the combined use of culture-independent techniques with conventional methods to investigate the ecology of bacteria in their natural habitats.

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 · 10.1016/j.femsec.2004.02.004

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 169

Metadata

Authors
Gremion, F., Chatzinotas, A., Kaufmann, K., Sigler, W., & Harms, H.
Venue
FEMS Microbiology Ecology
Published
2004-05
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
273-283
ISSN
  • 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
  • 1574-6941
OpenAlex
W2119275725
Cited by
169
References
1
FWCI
7.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Impacts of heavy metal contamination and phytoremediation on a microbial community during a twelve-month microcosm experiment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.femsec.2004.02.004
The paper
Gremion, F., Chatzinotas, A., Kaufmann, K., Sigler, W., & Harms, H. (2004). Impacts of heavy metal contamination and phytoremediation on a microbial community during a twelve-month microcosm experiment. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsec.2004.02.004

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.