Cited by 42Heavy metals in environmentMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsMicrobial bioremediation and biosurfactants

Impact of poplar-based phytomanagement on soil properties and microbial communities in a metal-contaminated site

Open access
Foulon, Julie, Zappelini, Cyril, Durand, Alexis, Valot, Benoit, Blaudez, Damien, Chalot, Michel·2016·FEMS Microbiology Ecology

Abstract

Despite a long history of use in phytomanagement strategies, the impacts of poplar trees on the structure and function of microbial communities that live in the soil remain largely unknown. The current study combined fungal and bacterial community analyses from different management regimes using Illumina-based sequencing with soil analysis. The poplar phytomanagement regimes led to a significant increase in soil fertility and a decreased bioavailability of Zn and Cd, in concert with changes in the microbial communities. The most notable changes in the relative abundance of taxa and operational taxonomic units unsurprisingly indicated that root and soil constitute distinct ecological microbial habitats, as exemplified by the dominance of Laccaria in root samples. The poplar cultivar was also an important driver, explaining 12% and 6% of the variance in the fungal and bacterial data sets, respectively. The overall dominance of saprophytic fungi, e.g. Penicillium canescens, might be related to the decomposition activities needed at the experimental site. Our data further highlighted that the mycorrhizal colonization of poplar cultivars varies greatly between the species and genotypes, which is exemplified by the dominance of Scleroderma under Vesten samples. Further interactions between fungal and bacterial functional groups stressed the potential of high-throughput sequencing technologies in uncovering the microbial ecology of disturbed environments.

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 · 10.1093/femsec/fiw163

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Phytomanagement of contaminated soils can promote the structural and functional biodiversity within soil microbial communities, mesofauna, butterflies and other animals.

    “Additionally, phytomanagement of contaminated soils can promote the structural and functional biodiversity within soil microbial communities (Cavani et al., 2016;Foulon et al., 2016;Touceda-González et al., 2017a, b), mesofauna (De Vaufleury et al., 2013), butterflies (Mulder and Breure, 2006) and other animals.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Baum C, Makeschin F. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus fertil- ization on mycorrhizal formation of two poplar clones (Pop- ulus trichocarpa and P. tremula x tremuloides). J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 2000;163:491-7.
  2. Bontemps C, Toussaint M, Revol P-V et al. Taxonomic and func- tional diversity of Streptomyces in a forest soil. FEMS Micro- biol Lett 2013;342:157-67.
  3. Mercier C, Boyer F, Bonin A et al. SUMATRA and SUMACLUST: fast and exact comparison and clustering of sequences. Programs and Abstracts of the SeqBio 2013 Workshop, 27-9.
  4. Smith SE, Read DJ. Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. Amsterdam, Boston: Academic Press, 2008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Foulon, J., Zappelini, C., Durand, A., Valot, B., Blaudez, D., & Chalot, M.
Affiliations
  • Université de Bourgogne (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Chalot, Michel
Venue
FEMS Microbiology Ecology
Published
2016-07-31
Volume
92
Issue
10
Pages
fiw163
ISSN
  • 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
  • 1574-6941
OpenAlex
W2480940176
Cited by
42
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • FEMS Microbiology Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (06-ECOT-O15-01, ANR-10-INTB-1703)
  • Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie (1172C0053, PROLIPHYT 1172C0053)
  • Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microbial bioremediation and biosurfactants
Keywords
soil microbial communities, metal-contaminated soil, zinc bioavailability, cadmium bioavailability, soil fertility, mycorrhizal colonization, Laccaria, systemic sclerosis, poplar cultivars, fungal-bacterial interactions, saprotrophic fungi, Penicillium canescens, root-associated microorganisms, soil disturbance
MeSH terms
Biodegradation, Environmental, Environment, Metals, Soil, Soil Microbiology, Soil Pollutants, Ecosystem, Plant Roots, Populus, Mycorrhizae, Microbial Consortia, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

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