The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microbial carbon limitation: The need for integrating microorganisms into our understanding of ecosystem carbon cycling
Open accessAbstract
Numerous studies have demonstrated that fertilization with nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium increases plant productivity in both natural and managed ecosystems, demonstrating that primary productivity is nutrient limited in most terrestrial ecosystems. In contrast, it has been demonstrated that heterotrophic microbial communities in soil are primarily limited by organic carbon or energy. While this concept of contrasting limitations, that is, microbial carbon and plant nutrient limitation, is based on strong evidence that we review in this paper, it is often ignored in discussions of ecosystem response to global environment changes. The plant‐centric perspective has equated plant nutrient limitations with those of whole ecosystems, thereby ignoring the important role of the heterotrophs responsible for soil decomposition in driving ecosystem carbon storage. To truly integrate carbon and nutrient cycles in ecosystem science, we must account for the fact that while plant productivity may be nutrient limited, the secondary productivity by heterotrophic communities is inherently carbon limited. Ecosystem carbon cycling integrates the independent physiological responses of its individual components, as well as tightly coupled exchanges between autotrophs and heterotrophs. To the extent that the interacting autotrophic and heterotrophic processes are controlled by organisms that are limited by nutrient versus carbon accessibility, respectively, we propose that ecosystems by definition cannot be ‘limited’ by nutrients or carbon alone. Here, we outline how models aimed at predicting non‐steady state ecosystem responses over time can benefit from dissecting ecosystems into the organismal components and their inherent limitations to better represent plant–microbe interactions in coupled carbon and nutrient models.
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
C:N:P stoichiometry in soil: is there a “Redfield ratio” for the microbial biomass?
Cleveland, C. C., & Liptzin, D. (2007) · Biogeochemistry · doi:10.1007/s10533-007-9132-0 · Cited by 2,365
Stability of organic carbon in deep soil layers controlled by fresh carbon supply
Fontaine, S., Barot, S., Barré, P., Bdioui, N., Mary, B., & Rumpel, C. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06275 · Cited by 2,279
Formation of soil organic matter via biochemical and physical pathways of litter mass loss
Cotrufo, M. F., Soong, J. L., Horton, A. J., Campbell, E. E., Haddix, M. L., Wall, D. H., & Parton, W. J. (2015) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/ngeo2520 · Cited by 1,874
Self-citationEcosystem carbon storage in arctic tundra reduced by long-term nutrient fertilization
Mack, M. C., Schuur, E. A. G., Bret-Harte, M. S., Shaver, G. R., & Chapin, F. S. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02887 · Cited by 1,030
Mooshammer, M., Wanek, W., Hämmerle, I., Fuchslueger, L., Hofhansl, F., Knoltsch, A., Schnecker, J., Takriti, M., Watzka, M., Wild, B., et al. (2014) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms4694 · Cited by 1,010
Self-citationDifferential priming of soil carbon driven by soil depth and root impacts on carbon availability
de Graaff, M.-A., Jastrow, J. D., Gillette, S., Johns, A., & Wullschleger, S. D. (2014) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.10.047 · Cited by 155
Cited by
Rocci, K. S., Lavallee, J. M., Stewart, C. E., & Cotrufo, M. F. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148569 · Cited by 470
Changes in plant inputs alter soil carbon and microbial communities in forest ecosystems
Feng, J., He, K., Zhang, Q., Han, M., & Zhu, B. (2022) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.16107 · Cited by 414
Five years of whole-soil warming led to loss of subsoil carbon stocks and increased CO 2 efflux
Soong, J. L., Castanha, C., Hicks Pries, C. E., Ofiti, N., Porras, R. C., Riley, W. J., Schmidt, M. W. I., & Torn, M. S. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abd1343 · Cited by 294
Self-citationZeng, K., Huang, X., Guo, J., Dai, C., He, C., Chen, H., & Xin, G. (2024) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2024.108467 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Soong, J. L., Fuchslueger, L., Marañon‐Jimenez, S., Torn, M. S., Janssens, I. A., Penuelas, J., & Richter, A.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-01-25
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1953-1961
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2996335903
- Cited by
- 564
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 30.63
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microbial carbon limitation: The need for integrating microorganisms into our understanding of ecosystem carbon cycling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/gcb.14962
- The paper
- Soong, J. L., Fuchslueger, L., Marañon‐Jimenez, S., Torn, M. S., Janssens, I. A., Penuelas, J., & Richter, A. (2020). Microbial carbon limitation: The need for integrating microorganisms into our understanding of ecosystem carbon cycling. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14962
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.