The DOI matches its Crossref record; 94 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microbial communities and their relevance for ecosystem models: Decomposition as a case study
Open accessAbstract
Soil microbial communities are so vastly diverse that complex interactions, which alter ecosystem functions, may occur among microbial species and functional groups. In this review, we explore the empirical evidence for situations when shifts in the community structure of microbes would elicit a change in ecosystem process rates, specifically decomposition, even when microbial biomass remains constant. In particular, we are interested in a subset of these scenarios in which knowledge of microbial community structure would improve model predictions for ecosystem functions. Results from microcosm and field studies indicate that microbial species diversity, functional group diversity, and community composition can all influence ecosystem process rates. The underlying mechanisms that may elicit changes in ecosystem functions from shifts in microbial community structure include evolutionary constraints on microbial trait adaptation, trait correlations, dispersal limitation, and species interactions. The extent of microbial diversity in soils is not known, so it is presently not possible to model all scenarios of microbial community structure shifts. However, by incorporating documented patterns in functional groups that are relevant for a particular ecosystem process and potential relationships between microbial phylogeny and function, the predictive power of process models will be significantly improved. The inclusion of this information into process models is critical for predicting and understanding how ecosystem functions may shift in response to global change.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change
Davidson, E. A., & Janssens, I. A. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04514 · Cited by 6,919
Prokaryotes: The unseen majority
Whitman, W. B., Coleman, D. C., & Wiebe, W. J. (1998) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.95.12.6578 · Cited by 4,871 · cited 1×
“Soil microbial communities are many times more diverse than their associated plant and animal communities (Whitman et al., 1998; Hawksworth, 2001), and less than 5% of all microbes have been identified and described (Schleifer, 2004).”
BackgroundDecomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems
Swift, M. J., Heal, O. W., & Anderson, J. M. (1979) · University of California Press eBooks · doi:10.1525/9780520407114 · Cited by 4,582
Analysis of Factors Controlling Soil Organic Matter Levels in Great Plains Grasslands
Parton, W. J., Schimel, D. S., Cole, C. V., & Ojima, D. S. (1987) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1987.03615995005100050015x · Cited by 3,759
Gauze, G. F. (1934) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.4489 · Cited by 3,285
Microbial biogeography: putting microorganisms on the map
Martiny, J. B. H., Bohannan, B. J. M., Brown, J. H., Colwell, R. K., Fuhrman, J. A., Green, J. L., Horner-Devine, M. C., Kane, M., Krumins, J. A., Kuske, C. R., et al. (2006) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1341 · Cited by 3,022
Terrestrial ecosystem production: A process model based on global satellite and surface data
Potter, C. S., Randerson, J. T., Field, C. B., Matson, P. A., Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., & Klooster, S. A. (1993) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/93gb02725 · Cited by 2,986
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
Assembly and response rules: two goals for predictive community ecology
Keddy, P. A. (1992) · Journal of Vegetation Science · doi:10.2307/3235676 · Cited by 2,193
(2012) · SpringerReference · doi:10.1007/springerreference_76825 · Cited by 2,069
Cited by
Persistence of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property
Schmidt, M. W. I., Torn, M. S., Abiven, S., Dittmar, T., Guggenberger, G., Janssens, I. A., Kleber, M., Kögel-Knabner, I., Lehmann, J., Manning, D. A. C., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10386 · Cited by 6,057
Understanding the dominant controls on litter decomposition
Bradford, M. A., Berg, B., Maynard, D. S., Wieder, W. R., & Wood, S. A. (2016) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12507 · Cited by 669
Fungal traits that drive ecosystem dynamics on land
Treseder, K. K., & Lennon, J. T. (2015) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00001-15 · Cited by 625
Self-citationvan der Wal, A., Geydan, T. D., Kuyper, T. W., & de Boer, W. (2013) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/1574-6976.12001 · Cited by 404
Decomposition responses to climate depend on microbial community composition
Glassman, S. I., Weihe, C., Li, J., Albright, M. B. N., Looby, C. I., Martiny, A. C., Treseder, K. K., Allison, S. D., & Martiny, J. B. H. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1811269115 · Cited by 365
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- McGuire, K. L., & Treseder, K. K.
- Venue
- Soil Biology and Biochemistry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-04
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 529-535
- ISSN
- 0038-0717 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2084967844
- Cited by
- 419
- References
- 94
- FWCI
- 25.31
- 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: Microbial communities and their relevance for ecosystem models: Decomposition as a case study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.016
- The paper
- McGuire, K. L., & Treseder, K. K. (2010). Microbial communities and their relevance for ecosystem models: Decomposition as a case study. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.016
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.
