The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fungal and bacterial growth responses to N fertilization and pH in the 150-year ‘Park Grass’ UK grassland experiment: N and pH influence on microbial growth in grassland soils
Open accessAbstract
The effects of nitrogen (N) fertilization (0-150 kg N ha⁻¹ year⁻¹ since 1865) and pH (3.3-7.4) on fungal and bacterial growth, biomass and phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) composition were investigated in grassland soils from the 'Park Grass Experiment', Rothamsted Research, UK. Bacterial growth decreased and fungal growth increased with lower pH, resulting in a 50-fold increase in the relative importance of fungi between pH 7.4 and 3.3. The PLFA-based fungal:bacterial biomass ratio was unchanged between pH 4.5 and 7.4, and decreased only below pH 4.5. Respiration and substrate-induced respiration biomass both decreased three- to fourfold with lower pH, but biomass concentrations estimated using PLFAs were unaffected by pH. N fertilization did not affect bacterial growth and marginally affected fungal growth while PLFA biomass marker concentrations were all reduced by higher N additions. Respiration decreased with higher N application, suggesting a reduced quality of the soil organic carbon. The PLFA composition was strongly affected by both pH and N. A comparison with a pH gradient in arable soil allowed us to generalize the pH effect between systems. There are 30-50-fold increases in the relative importance of fungi between high (7.4-8.3) and low (3.3-4.5) pH with concomitant reductions of respiration by 30-70%.
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
The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities
Fierer, N., & Jackson, R. B. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507535103 · Cited by 5,711
Van Der Heijden, M. G. A., Bardgett, R. D., & Van Straalen, N. M. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01139.x · Cited by 5,053
Lauber, C. L., Hamady, M., Knight, R., & Fierer, N. (2009) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.00335-09 · Cited by 4,063
Nitrogen additions and microbial biomass: a meta-analysis of ecosystem studies
Treseder, K. K. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01230.x · Cited by 1,607
Functional- and abundance-based mechanisms explain diversity loss due to N fertilization
Suding, K. N., Collins, S. L., Gough, L., Clark, C., Cleland, E. E., Gross, K. L., Milchunas, D. G., & Pennings, S. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0408648102 · Cited by 1,053
Cited by
Francioli, D., Schulz, E., Lentendu, G., Wubet, T., Buscot, F., & Reitz, T. (2016) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.01446 · Cited by 759
van der Wal, A., Geydan, T. D., Kuyper, T. W., & de Boer, W. (2013) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/1574-6976.12001 · Cited by 404
Metadata
- Authors
- Rousk, J., Brookes, P. C., & Bååth, E.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-01-17
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 89-99
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2106979854
- Cited by
- 212
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 18.33
- 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: Fungal and bacterial growth responses to N fertilization and pH in the 150-year ‘Park Grass’ UK grassland experiment: N and pH influence on microbial growth in grassland soils. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.01032.x
- The paper
- Rousk, J., Brookes, P. C., & Bååth, E. (2011). Fungal and bacterial growth responses to N fertilization and pH in the 150-year ‘Park Grass’ UK grassland experiment: N and pH influence on microbial growth in grassland soils. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.01032.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.