The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microbially Derived Inputs to Soil Organic Matter: Are Current Estimates Too Low?
Abstract
Soil microbes are central to many soil processes, but due to the structural complexity of soil organic matter, the accurate quantification of microbial biomass contributions continues to pose a significant analytical challenge. In this study, microbes from a range of soils were cultured such that their molecular profile could be compared to that of soil organic matter and native vegetation. With the use of modern NMR spectroscopy, the contributions from microbial species can be discerned in soil organic matter and quantified. On the basis of these studies, the contributions of microbial biomass to soil organic matter appear to be much higher than the 1-5% reported by other researchers. In some soils, microbial biomass was found to contribute >50% of the extractable soil organic matter fractions and approximately 45% of the humin fraction and accounted for >80% of the soil nitrogen. These findings are significant because organic matter is intimately linked to nutrient release and transport in soils, nitrogen turnover rates, contaminant fate, soil quality, and fertility. Therefore, if in some cases soil organic matter and soil organic nitrogen are predominately of microbial origin, it is likely that this fraction, whether in the form of preserved material or living cells, plays an underestimated role in several soil processes.
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
Molecular structure in soil humic substances: the new view
Sutton, R., & Sposito, G. (2005) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es050778q · Cited by 1,316
Cited by
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
Plant diversity increases soil microbial activity and soil carbon storage
Lange, M., Eisenhauer, N., Sierra, C. A., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Griffiths, R. I., Mellado-Vázquez, P. G., Malik, A. A., Roy, J., Scheu, S., et al. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms7707 · Cited by 1,742
Dynamic interactions at the mineral–organic matter interface
Kleber, M., Bourg, I. C., Coward, E. K., Hansel, C. M., Myneni, S. C. B., & Nunan, N. (2021) · Nature Reviews Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43017-021-00162-y · Cited by 1,254
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
Self-citationLife 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
Metadata
- Authors
- Simpson, A. J., Simpson, M. J., Smith, E., & Kelleher, B. P.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-10-12
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 8070-8076
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2074782014
- Cited by
- 524
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.