The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative metatranscriptomics reveals kingdom level changes in the rhizosphere microbiome of plants
Open accessAbstract
Plant–microbe interactions in the rhizosphere have important roles in biogeochemical cycling, and maintenance of plant health and productivity, yet remain poorly understood. Using RNA-based metatranscriptomics, the global active microbiomes were analysed in soil and rhizospheres of wheat, oat, pea and an oat mutant (sad1) deficient in production of anti-fungal avenacins. Rhizosphere microbiomes differed from bulk soil and between plant species. Pea (a legume) had a much stronger effect on the rhizosphere than wheat and oat (cereals), resulting in a dramatically different rhizosphere community. The relative abundance of eukaryotes in the oat and pea rhizospheres was more than fivefold higher than in the wheat rhizosphere or bulk soil. Nematodes and bacterivorous protozoa were enriched in all rhizospheres, whereas the pea rhizosphere was highly enriched for fungi. Metabolic capabilities for rhizosphere colonisation were selected, including cellulose degradation (cereals), H2 oxidation (pea) and methylotrophy (all plants). Avenacins had little effect on the prokaryotic community of oat, but the eukaryotic community was strongly altered in the sad1 mutant, suggesting that avenacins have a broader role than protecting from fungal pathogens. Profiling microbial communities with metatranscriptomics allows comparison of relative abundance, from multiple samples, across all domains of life, without polymerase chain reaction bias. This revealed profound differences in the rhizosphere microbiome, particularly at the kingdom level between plants.
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
Accurate whole human genome sequencing using reversible terminator chemistry
Bentley, D. R., Balasubramanian, S., Swerdlow, H. P., Smith, G. P., Milton, J., Brown, C. G., Hall, K. P., Evers, D. J., Barnes, C. L., Bignell, H. R., et al. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature07517 · Cited by 3,684
Cited by
Microbial hotspots and hot moments in soil: Concept & review
Kuzyakov, Y., & Blagodatskaya, E. (2015) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.01.025 · Cited by 1,872
Turner, T. R., James, E. K., & Poole, P. S. (2013) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2013-14-6-209 · Cited by 1,349
Self-citationRhizosphere interactions: root exudates, microbes, and microbial communities
Huang, X.-F., Chaparro, J. M., Reardon, K. F., Zhang, R., Shen, Q., & Vivanco, J. M. (2014) · Botany · doi:10.1139/cjb-2013-0225 · Cited by 824
Rook, G. A. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1313731110 · Cited by 760
Impact of plant domestication on rhizosphere microbiome assembly and functions
Pérez-Jaramillo, J. E., Mendes, R., & Raaijmakers, J. M. (2016) · Plant Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/s11103-015-0337-7 · Cited by 732
Metadata
- Authors
- Turner, T. R., Ramakrishnan, K., Walshaw, J., Heavens, D., Alston, M., Swarbreck, D., Osbourn, A., Grant, A., & Poole, P. S.
- Venue
- The ISME Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-07-18
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2248-2258
- ISSN
- 1751-7362 (ISSN-L)
- 1751-7370
- OpenAlex
- W2008995162
- Cited by
- 582
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 29.17
- 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: Comparative metatranscriptomics reveals kingdom level changes in the rhizosphere microbiome of plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ismej.2013.119
- The paper
- Turner, T. R., Ramakrishnan, K., Walshaw, J., Heavens, D., Alston, M., Swarbreck, D., Osbourn, A., Grant, A., & Poole, P. S. (2013). Comparative metatranscriptomics reveals kingdom level changes in the rhizosphere microbiome of plants. The ISME Journal. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2013.119
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.