Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 255

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Contrasting effects of glucose, living roots and maize straw on microbial growth kinetics and substrate availability in soil

Blagodatskaya, E. V., Blagodatsky, S. A., Anderson, T.‐H., Kuzyakov, Y.·2009·European Journal of Soil Science

Abstract

Summary: The most modern molecular approaches fail to link structure of soil microbial community with its functions. We used classical physiological approaches based on (i) microbial growth kinetics and (ii) microbial affinity to the substrate to show the shift in functional properties of the soil microbial community after amendments with substrates of contrasting availability. Kinetic parameters of substrate‐induced respiration and substrate availability in soil were monitored during the growth of maize, and decomposition of glucose or maize straw. Input of small amounts of easily available substrates (i.e. glucose or root exudates) significantly increased the specific growth rates of soil microorganisms by up to 13 and 20%, respectively. This increase, showing the shift from K to r strategies, was confirmed by a 50% decrease in the affinity of microorganisms to the easily available substrates. In contrast, maize straw lowered specific growth rates by 16–30% and increased the affinity of microorganisms to the substrate by 23–131% compared with untreated soil. After maize straw addition, the shift of the microbial community to K strategy was accompanied by an increase in the fraction of microbial biomass responding to glucose addition by immediate growth. The generation time of this fraction was 1.8 to 2.8 hours, which was 100 to 1000 times faster than that of the whole microbial community. Easily available carbon (C) in soil amended with maize straw comprised only half of that extracted by 0.05 m K 2 SO 4 . Therefore, we conclude that C extracted by 0.05 m K 2 SO 4 from the soil with maize straw residues had a lower availability for microorganisms as compared with glucose. Adding N to the soil prolonged the intensive mineralization period of plant residues, decreased specific microbial growth rates and increased the amount of easily available C in the soil. This indicates a more efficient use of maize residues by K‐selected microorganisms after the removal of N limitation. Combination of two complementary physiological approaches based on microbial growth kinetics and substrate affinity showed contrasting effects of easily and less available substrates on the shift of growth strategies (r vs. K) of the whole microbial community. These approaches are also suitable for estimation of microbial availability of indigenous C in the soil.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2008.01103.x

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.

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

Cited by

See all 255

Metadata

Authors
Blagodatskaya, E. V., Blagodatsky, S. A., Anderson, T. ‐., & Kuzyakov, Y.
Venue
European Journal of Soil Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-03-13
Volume
60
Issue
2
Pages
186-197
ISSN
  • 1351-0754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2389
OpenAlex
W2025370873
Cited by
255
References
0
FWCI
17.06
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Contrasting effects of glucose, living roots and maize straw on microbial growth kinetics and substrate availability in soil. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2008.01103.x
The paper
Blagodatskaya, E. V., Blagodatsky, S. A., Anderson, T. ‐., & Kuzyakov, Y. (2009). Contrasting effects of glucose, living roots and maize straw on microbial growth kinetics and substrate availability in soil. European Journal of Soil Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2008.01103.x

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.