Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 461

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Spatial variability in airborne bacterial communities across land-use types and their relationship to the bacterial communities of potential source environments

Open access
Bowers, Robert M, McLetchie, Shawna, Knight, Rob, Fierer, Noah·2011·The ISME Journal

Abstract

Although bacteria are ubiquitous in the near-surface atmosphere and they can have important effects on human health, airborne bacteria have received relatively little attention and their spatial dynamics remain poorly understood. Owing to differences in meteorological conditions and the potential sources of airborne bacteria, we would expect the atmosphere over different land-use types to harbor distinct bacterial communities. To test this hypothesis, we sampled the near-surface atmosphere above three distinct land-use types (agricultural fields, suburban areas and forests) across northern Colorado, USA, sampling five sites per land-use type. Microbial abundances were stable across land-use types, with ∼105–106 bacterial cells per m3 of air, but the concentrations of biological ice nuclei, determined using a droplet freezing assay, were on average two and eight times higher in samples from agricultural areas than in the other two land-use types. Likewise, the composition of the airborne bacterial communities, assessed via bar-coded pyrosequencing, was significantly related to land-use type and these differences were likely driven by shifts in the sources of bacteria to the atmosphere across the land-uses, not local meteorological conditions. A meta-analysis of previously published data shows that atmospheric bacterial communities differ from those in potential source environments (leaf surfaces and soils), and we demonstrate that we may be able to use this information to determine the relative inputs of bacteria from these source environments to the atmosphere. This work furthers our understanding of bacterial diversity in the atmosphere, the terrestrial controls on this diversity and potential approaches for source tracking of airborne bacteria.

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 · 10.1038/ismej.2010.167

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

See all 461

Metadata

Authors
Bowers, R. M., McLetchie, S., Knight, R., & Fierer, N.
Venue
The ISME Journal
Published
2010-11-04
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
601-612
ISSN
  • 1751-7362 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-7370
OpenAlex
W1989581293
Cited by
461
References
5
FWCI
9.03
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

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.