Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 189

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Land use change alters functional gene diversity, composition and abundance in Amazon forest soil microbial communities

Open access
Paula, Fabiana S., Rodrigues, Jorge L. M., Zhou, Jizhong, Wu, Liyou, Mueller, Rebecca C., Mirza, Babur S., Bohannan, Brendan J. M., Nüsslein, Klaus, Deng, Ye, Tiedje, James M., Pellizari, Vivian H.·2014·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

Land use change in the Amazon rainforest alters the taxonomic structure of soil microbial communities, but whether it alters their functional gene composition is unknown. We used the highly parallel microarray technology GeoChip 4.0, which contains 83 992 probes specific for genes linked nutrient cycling and other processes, to evaluate how the diversity, abundance and similarity of the targeted genes responded to forest‐to‐pasture conversion. We also evaluated whether these parameters were reestablished with secondary forest growth. A spatially nested scheme was employed to sample a primary forest, two pastures (6 and 38 years old) and a secondary forest. Both pastures had significantly lower microbial functional genes richness and diversity when compared to the primary forest. Gene composition and turnover were also significantly modified with land use change. Edaphic traits associated with soil acidity, iron availability, soil texture and organic matter concentration were correlated with these gene changes. Although primary and secondary forests showed similar functional gene richness and diversity, there were differences in gene composition and turnover, suggesting that community recovery was not complete in the secondary forest. Gene association analysis revealed that response to ecosystem conversion varied significantly across functional gene groups, with genes linked to carbon and nitrogen cycling mostly altered. This study indicates that diversity and abundance of numerous environmentally important genes respond to forest‐to‐pasture conversion and hence have the potential to affect the related processes at an ecosystem scale.

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/mec.12786

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cited by

See all 189

Metadata

Authors
Paula, F. S., Rodrigues, J. L. M., Zhou, J., Wu, L., Mueller, R. C., Mirza, B. S., Bohannan, B. J. M., Nüsslein, K., Deng, Y., Tiedje, J. M., & Pellizari, V. H.
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-06
Volume
23
Issue
12
Pages
2988-2999
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W2113819507
Cited by
189
References
3
FWCI
20.53
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

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.