The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Soil biodiversity and carbon cycling: a review and synthesis of studies examining diversity–function relationships
Abstract
Biodiversity and carbon (C) cycling have been the focus of much research in recent decades, partly because both change as a result of anthropogenic activities that are likely to continue. Soils are extremely species‐rich and store approximately 80% of global terrestrial C. Soil organisms play a key role in C dynamics and a loss of species through global changes could influence global C dynamics. Here, we synthesize findings from published studies that have manipulated soil species richness and measured the response in terms of ecosystem functions related to C cycling (such as decomposition, respiration and the abundance or biomass of decomposer biota) to evaluate the impact of biodiversity loss on C dynamics. We grouped studies where one or more biotic groups had been manipulated to include a richness of ≤10 species or >10 species in order to reflect ‘low’ and ‘high’ extents of diversity manipulations. There was a positive relationship between species richness and C cycling in 77–100% of low‐diversity experiments, even when the richness of just one biotic group was manipulated, whereas positive relationships occurred less frequently in studies with greater richness (35–64%). Moreover, when positive relationships were observed, these often indicated functional redundancy at low extents of diversity or that community composition had a stronger influence on C cycling than did species richness. Initial reductions in soil species richness resulting from global changes are unlikely to alter C dynamics significantly unless particularly influential species are lost. However, changes in community composition, and the loss of species with an ability to facilitate specialized soil processes related to C cycling, as a result of global changes, may have larger impacts on C dynamics.
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
Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity in a fluctuating environment: The insurance hypothesis
Yachi, S., & Loreau, M. (1999) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.96.4.1463 · Cited by 3,211
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
Plant functional traits and soil carbon sequestration in contrasting biomes
De Deyn, G. B., Cornelissen, J. H. C., & Bardgett, R. D. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01164.x · Cited by 1,431
Self-citationThe contribution of species richness and composition to bacterial services
Bell, T., Newman, J. A., Silverman, B. W., Turner, S. L., & Lilley, A. K. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03891 · Cited by 950
Nepstad, D. C., Stickler, C. M., Filho, B. S., & Merry, F. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.0036 · Cited by 725
Biodiversity regulates ecosystem predictability
McGrady-Steed, J., Harris, P. M., & Morin, P. J. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/36561 · Cited by 720
Global decomposition experiment shows soil animal impacts on decomposition are climate‐dependent
WALL, D. H., BRADFORD, M. A., ST. JOHN, M. G., TROFYMOW, J. A., BEHAN‐PELLETIER, V., BIGNELL, D. E., DANGERFIELD, J. M., PARTON, W. J., RUSEK, J., VOIGT, W., et al. (2008) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01672.x · Cited by 542
Self-citationCOLE, L., STADDON, P. L., SLEEP, D., & BARDGETT, R. D. (2004) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.0269-8463.2004.00894.x · Cited by 54
Self-citation
Cited by
Ecological intensification: harnessing ecosystem services for food security
Bommarco, R., Kleijn, D., & Potts, S. G. (2013) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.012 · Cited by 1,862
Soil organic matter turnover is governed by accessibility not recalcitrance
Dungait, J. A. J., Hopkins, D. W., Gregory, A. S., & Whitmore, A. P. (2012) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02665.x · Cited by 1,616
Insights into the resistance and resilience of the soil microbial community
Griffiths, B. S., & Philippot, L. (2013) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1574-6976.2012.00343.x · Cited by 1,117
Soil networks become more connected and take up more carbon as nature restoration progresses
Morriën, E., Hannula, S. E., Snoek, L. B., Helmsing, N. R., Zweers, H., de Hollander, M., Soto, R. L., Bouffaud, M.-L., Buée, M., Dimmers, W., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms14349 · Cited by 936
Functional Redundancy-Induced Stability of Gut Microbiota Subjected to Disturbance
Moya, A., & Ferrer, M. (2016) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2016.02.002 · Cited by 690
Metadata
- Authors
- Nielsen, U. N., Ayres, E., Wall, D. H., & Bardgett, R. D.
- Venue
- European Journal of Soil Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-11-16
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 105-116
- ISSN
- 1351-0754 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2389
- OpenAlex
- W2154148518
- Cited by
- 609
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 34.86
- 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: Soil biodiversity and carbon cycling: a review and synthesis of studies examining diversity–function relationships. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01314.x
- The paper
- Nielsen, U. N., Ayres, E., Wall, D. H., & Bardgett, R. D. (2011). Soil biodiversity and carbon cycling: a review and synthesis of studies examining diversity–function relationships. European Journal of Soil Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01314.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.