The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The ratio of Gram-positive to Gram-negative bacterial PLFA markers as an indicator of carbon availability in organic soils
Open accessAbstract
Despite recent progress in understanding soil microbial responses to carbon (C) limitation, the functional shifts in microbial community structure associated with decreasing soil C availability and changes in organic matter chemistry remain poorly known. It has been proposed that Gram-negative (GN) bacteria use more plant-derived C sources that are relatively labile, while Gram-positive (GP) bacteria use C sources derived from soil organic matter that are more recalcitrant. Because these two groups may differ in how they influence the fate of different C forms in soils, it is important to understand how they vary across ecosystems that differ in their vegetation cover and ecosystem productivity or across environmental gradients . In this study, we used a 19-year plant functional group removal experiment across a long term post-fire chronosequence to assess how microbial community structure (assessed using phospholipids fatty acids; PLFAs) and the association of bacterial functional groups (specifically, the GP:GN ratio) responded to changes in organic matter chemistry (measured via nuclear magnetic resonance; NMR). We found that the GP:GN ratio increased upon removal of shrubs and tree roots and with decreasing ecosystem productivity along the chronosequence , thus showing the greater dependence of GN than GP bacteria on more labile plant-derived C. Overall, GN bacteria were associated with simple C compounds (alkyls) whereas GP bacteria were more strongly associated with more complex C forms (carbonyls). Therefore, we conclude that the GP:GN ratio has potential as a useful indicator of the relative C availability for soil bacterial communities in organic soils, and can be used as a coarse indicator of energy limitation in natural ecosystems.
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
TOWARD AN ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL BACTERIA
Fierer, N., Bradford, M. A., & Jackson, R. B. (2007) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/05-1839 · Cited by 5,079
Cotrufo, M. F., Wallenstein, M. D., Boot, C. M., Denef, K., & Paul, E. (2013) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.12113 · Cited by 3,552
Variations in microbial community composition through two soil depth profiles
Fierer, N., Schimel, J. P., & Holden, P. A. (2003) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/s0038-0717(02)00251-1 · Cited by 1,817
Roots and Associated Fungi Drive Long-Term Carbon Sequestration in Boreal Forest
Clemmensen, K. E., Bahr, A., Ovaskainen, O., Dahlberg, A., Ekblad, A., Wallander, H., Stenlid, J., Finlay, R. D., Wardle, D. A., & Lindahl, B. D. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1231923 · Cited by 1,537
Self-citationMicrobial control over carbon cycling in soil
Schimel, J. P., & Schaeffer, S. M. (2012) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2012.00348 · Cited by 1,480
Clemmensen, K. E., Finlay, R. D., Dahlberg, A., Stenlid, J., Wardle, D. A., & Lindahl, B. D. (2015) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.13208 · Cited by 647
Self-citationThe influence of island area on ecosystem properties
Wardle, D. A., Zackrisson, O., Hörnberg, G., & Gallet, C. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.277.5330.1296 · Cited by 641
Self-citationControls on soil microbial community stability under climate change
de Vries, F. T., & Shade, A. (2013) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2013.00265 · Cited by 546
Kramer, C., & Gleixner, G. (2008) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.09.016 · Cited by 523
Impact of wheat straw decomposition on successional patterns of soil microbial community structure.
Bastian, F., Bouziri, L., Nicolardot, B., & Ranjard, L. (2009) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.10.024 · Cited by 433
Cited by
Plant- or microbial-derived? A review on the molecular composition of stabilized soil organic matter
Angst, G., Mueller, K. E., Nierop, K. G. J., & Simpson, M. J. (2021) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108189 · Cited by 1,196
Life and death in the soil microbiome: how ecological processes influence biogeochemistry
Sokol, N. W., Slessarev, E., Marschmann, G. L., Nicolas, A., Blazewicz, S. J., Brodie, E. L., Firestone, M. K., Foley, M. M., Hestrin, R., Hungate, B. A., et al. (2022) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-022-00695-z · Cited by 1,179
Nutrient-induced acidification modulates soil biodiversity-function relationships
Hu, Z., Delgado-Baquerizo, M., Fanin, N., Chen, X., Zhou, Y., Du, G., Hu, F., Jiang, L., Hu, S., & Liu, M. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-47323-3 · Cited by 284
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fanin, N., Kardol, P., Farrell, M., Nilsson, M.-C., Gundale, M. J., & Wardle, D. A.
- Venue
- Soil Biology and Biochemistry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 128
- Pages
- 111-114
- ISSN
- 0038-0717 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2897793560
- Cited by
- 489
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 26.39
- 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: The ratio of Gram-positive to Gram-negative bacterial PLFA markers as an indicator of carbon availability in organic soils. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.10.010
- The paper
- Fanin, N., Kardol, P., Farrell, M., Nilsson, M.-C., Gundale, M. J., & Wardle, D. A. (2019). The ratio of Gram-positive to Gram-negative bacterial PLFA markers as an indicator of carbon availability in organic soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.10.010
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.