The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fungal and bacterial growth in soil with plant materials of different C/N ratios: Fungal and bacterial growth with plant materials in soil
Open accessAbstract
Fungal (acetate-in-ergosterol incorporation) and bacterial (leucine/thymidine incorporation) growth resulting from alfalfa (C/N=15) and barley straw (C/N=75) addition was studied in soil microcosms for 64 days. Nitrogen amendments were used to compensate for the C/N difference between the substrates. Fungal growth increased to a maximum after 3-7 days, at five to eight times the controls, following the addition of straw, and three to four times the controls following the addition of alfalfa. After 20-30 days, the fungal growth rate converged with the controls, resulting in a cumulative fungal growth two to three times the controls following straw addition and about 20% higher than the controls following alfalfa addition. The bacterial growth rate reached rates five times the controls following alfalfa addition and twice that of the controls following straw addition after 3-7 days. It remained elevated after 64 days. The cumulative bacterial growth was two and four times the controls following straw and alfalfa addition, respectively. A negative correlation was found between N addition and bacterial growth, while N stimulated fungal growth. Thus, the C/N ratio of the additions (substrate and extra N) could not entirely explain the different results regarding fungal and bacterial growths. Respiration was not always related to the combined growth of the microorganisms, emphasizing the requirement for a better understanding of growth efficiencies of fungi and bacteria.
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
Cited by
Microbial hotspots and hot moments in soil: Concept & review
Kuzyakov, Y., & Blagodatskaya, E. (2015) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.01.025 · Cited by 1,872
Life and death in the soil microbiome: how ecological processes influence biogeochemistry
Sokol, N. W., Slessarev, E., Marschmann, G. L., Nicolas, A., Blazewicz, S. J., Brodie, E. L., Firestone, M. K., Foley, M. M., Hestrin, R., Hungate, B. A., et al. (2022) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-022-00695-z · Cited by 1,179
Biochar mediated changes in soil quality and plant growth in a three year field trial
Jones, D. L., Rousk, J., Edwards-Jones, G., DeLuca, T. H., & Murphy, D. V. (2012) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.10.012 · Cited by 937
Self-citationGeyer, K. M., Kyker-Snowman, E., Grandy, A. S., & Frey, S. D. (2016) · Biogeochemistry · doi:10.1007/s10533-016-0191-y · Cited by 409
Ecology of Nitrogen Fixing, Nitrifying, and Denitrifying Microorganisms in Tropical Forest Soils
Pajares, S., & Bohannan, B. J. M. (2016) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.01045 · Cited by 331
Metadata
- Authors
- Rousk, J., & Bååth, E.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-12
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 258-267
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- 1574-6941
- OpenAlex
- W2141797113
- Cited by
- 430
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Fungal and bacterial growth in soil with plant materials of different C/N ratios: Fungal and bacterial growth with plant materials in soil. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00398.x
- The paper
- Rousk, J., & Bååth, E. (2007). Fungal and bacterial growth in soil with plant materials of different C/N ratios: Fungal and bacterial growth with plant materials in soil. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00398.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.