Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 569

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Molecular microbial diversity of an agricultural soil in Wisconsin

Open access
Borneman, J, Skroch, P W, O'Sullivan, K M, Palus, J A, Rumjanek, N G, Jansen, J L, Nienhuis, J, Triplett, E W·1996·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

A culture-independent survey of the soil microbial diversity in a clover-grass pasture in southern Wisconsin was conducted by sequence analysis of a universal clone library of genes coding for small-subunit rRNA (rDNA). A rapid and efficient method for extraction of DNA from soils which resulted in highly purified DNA with minimal shearing was developed. Universal small-subunit-rRNA primers were used to amplify DNA extracted from the pasture soil. The PCR products were cloned into pGEM-T, and either hypervariable or conserved regions were sequenced. The relationships of 124 sequences to those of cultured organisms of known phylogeny were determined. Of the 124 clones sequenced, 98.4% were from the domain Bacteria. Two of the rDNA sequences were derived from eukaryotic organelles. Two of the 124 sequences were of nuclear origin, one being fungal and the other a plant sequence. No sequences of the domain Archaea were found. Within the domain, Bacteria, three kingdoms were highly represented: the Proteobacteria (16.1%), the Cytophaga-Flexibacter-Bacteroides group (21.8%), and the low G+C-content gram-positive group (21.8%). Some kingdoms, such as the Thermotogales, the green nonsulfur group, Fusobacteria, and the Spirochaetes, were absent. A large number of the sequences (39.4%) were distributed among several clades that are not among the major taxa described by Olsen et al. (G.J. Olsen, C.R. Woese, and R. Overbeek, J. Bacteriol., 176:1-6, 1994). From the alignments of the sequence data, distance matrices were calculated to display the enormous microbial diversity found in this soil in two ways, as phylogenetic trees and as multidimensional-scaling plots.

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 · 10.1128/aem.62.6.1935-1943.1996

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 569

Metadata

Authors
Borneman, J., Skroch, P. W., O'Sullivan, K. M., Palus, J. A., Rumjanek, N. G., Jansen, J. L., Nienhuis, J., & Triplett, E. W.
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
1996-06
Volume
62
Issue
6
Pages
1935-1943
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2167571746
Cited by
569
References
2
FWCI
52.14
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: Molecular microbial diversity of an agricultural soil in Wisconsin. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.62.6.1935-1943.1996
The paper
Borneman, J., Skroch, P. W., O'Sullivan, K. M., Palus, J. A., Rumjanek, N. G., Jansen, J. L., Nienhuis, J., & Triplett, E. W. (1996). Molecular microbial diversity of an agricultural soil in Wisconsin. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.62.6.1935-1943.1996

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.