Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 901

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The bacterial biogeography of British soils

Griffiths, Robert I., Thomson, Bruce C., James, Phillip, Bell, Thomas, Bailey, Mark, Whiteley, Andrew S.·2011·Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Summary: Despite recognition of the importance of soil bacteria to terrestrial ecosystem functioning there is little consensus on the factors regulating belowground biodiversity. Here we present a multi‐scale spatial assessment of soil bacterial community profiles across Great Britain (> 1000 soil cores), and show the first landscape scale map of bacterial distributions across a nation. Bacterial diversity and community dissimilarities, assessed using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism, were most strongly related to soil pH providing a large‐scale confirmation of the role of pH in structuring bacterial taxa. However, while α diversity was positively related to pH, the converse was true for β diversity (between sample variance in α diversity). β diversity was found to be greatest in acidic soils, corresponding with greater environmental heterogeneity. Analyses of clone libraries revealed the pH effects were predominantly manifest at the level of broad bacterial taxonomic groups, with acidic soils being dominated by few taxa (notably the group 1 Acidobacteria and Alphaproteobacteria). We also noted significant correlations between bacterial communities and most other measured environmental variables (soil chemistry, aboveground features and climatic variables), together with significant spatial correlations at close distances. In particular, bacterial and plant communities were closely related signifying no strong evidence that soil bacteria are driven by different ecological processes to those governing higher organisms. We conclude that broad scale surveys are useful in identifying distinct soil biomes comprising reproducible communities of dominant taxa. Together these results provide a baseline ecological framework with which to pursue future research on both soil microbial function, and more explicit biome based assessments of the local ecological drivers of bacterial biodiversity.

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.1462-2920.2011.02480.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 901

Metadata

Authors
Griffiths, R. I., Thomson, B. C., James, P., Bell, T., Bailey, M., & Whiteley, A. S.
Venue
Environmental Microbiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-04-20
Volume
13
Issue
6
Pages
1642-1654
ISSN
  • 1462-2912 (ISSN-L)
  • 1462-2920
OpenAlex
W1920295170
Cited by
901
References
4
FWCI
31.38
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: The bacterial biogeography of British soils. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02480.x
The paper
Griffiths, R. I., Thomson, B. C., James, P., Bell, T., Bailey, M., & Whiteley, A. S. (2011). The bacterial biogeography of British soils. Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02480.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.