The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Growth of saprotrophic fungi and bacteria in soil
Open accessAbstract
Bacterial and fungal growth rate measurements are sensitive variables to detect changes in environmental conditions. However, while considerable progress has been made in methods to assess the species composition and biomass of fungi and bacteria, information about growth rates remains surprisingly rudimentary. We review the recent history of approaches to assess bacterial and fungal growth rates, leading up to current methods, especially focusing on leucine/thymidine incorporation to estimate bacterial growth and acetate incorporation into ergosterol to estimate fungal growth. We present the underlying assumptions for these methods, compare estimates of turnover times for fungi and bacteria based on them, and discuss issues, including for example elusive conversion factors. We review what the application of fungal and bacterial growth rate methods has revealed regarding the influence of the environmental factors of temperature, moisture (including drying/rewetting), pH, as well as the influence of substrate additions, the presence of plants and toxins. We highlight experiments exploring the competitive and facilitative interaction between bacteria and fungi enabled using growth rate methods. Finally, we predict that growth methods will be an important complement to molecular approaches to elucidate fungal and bacterial ecology, and we identify methodological concerns and how they should be addressed.
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
Carbon use efficiency of microbial communities: stoichiometry, methodology and modelling
Sinsabaugh, R. L., Manzoni, S., Moorhead, D. L., & Richter, A. (2013) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12113 · Cited by 991
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-citationSoil 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
Geyer, K. M., Kyker-Snowman, E., Grandy, A. S., & Frey, S. D. (2016) · Biogeochemistry · doi:10.1007/s10533-016-0191-y · Cited by 409
Thermal adaptation of decomposer communities in warming soils
Bradford, M. A. (2013) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2013.00333 · Cited by 379
Metadata
- Authors
- Rousk, J., & Bååth, E.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-04-28
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 17-30
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1941482455
- Cited by
- 509
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.21
- 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: Growth of saprotrophic fungi and bacteria in soil. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01106.x
- The paper
- Rousk, J., & Bååth, E. (2011). Growth of saprotrophic fungi and bacteria in soil. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01106.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.