The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Large Fraction of Dead and Inactive Bacteria in Coastal Marine Sediments: Comparison of Protocols for Determination and Ecological Significance
Open accessAbstract
It is now universally recognized that only a portion of aquatic bacteria is actively growing, but quantitative information on the fraction of living versus dormant or dead bacteria in marine sediments is completely lacking. We compared different protocols for the determination of the dead, dormant, and active bacterial fractions in two different marine sediments and at different depths into the sediment core. Bacterial counts ranged between (1.5 ± 0.2) × 10 8 cells g −1 and (53.1 ± 16.0) × 10 8 cells g −1 in sandy and muddy sediments, respectively. Bacteria displaying intact membrane (live bacterial cells) accounted for 26 to 30% of total bacterial counts, while dead cells represented the most abundant fraction (70 to 74%). Among living bacterial cells, nucleoid-containing cells represented only 4% of total bacterial counts, indicating that only a very limited fraction of bacterial assemblage was actively growing. Nucleoid-containing cells increased with increasing sediment organic content. The number of bacteria responsive to antibiotic treatment (direct viable count; range, 0.3 to 4.8% of the total bacterial number) was significantly lower than nucleoid-containing cell counts. An experiment of nutrient enrichment to stimulate a response of the dormant bacterial fraction determined a significant increase of nucleoid-containing cells. After nutrient enrichment, a large fraction of dormant bacteria (6 to 11% of the total bacterial number) was “reactivated.” Bacterial turnover rates estimated ranged from 0.01 to 0.1 day −1 but were 50 to 80 times higher when only the fraction of active bacteria was considered (on average 3.2 day −1 ). Our results suggest that the fraction of active bacteria in marine sediments is controlled by nutrient supply and availability and that their turnover rates are at least 1 order of magnitude higher than previously reported.
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
Samo, T. J., Kimbrel, J. A., Nilson, D. J., Pett‐Ridge, J., Weber, P. K., & Mayali, X. (2018) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/1462-2920.14357 · Cited by 87
Metadata
- Authors
- Luna, G. M., Manini, E., & Danovaro, R.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2002-07
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 3509-3513
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2103871364
- Cited by
- 238
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.35
- 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: Large Fraction of Dead and Inactive Bacteria in Coastal Marine Sediments: Comparison of Protocols for Determination and Ecological Significance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.68.7.3509-3513.2002
- The paper
- Luna, G. M., Manini, E., & Danovaro, R. (2002). Large Fraction of Dead and Inactive Bacteria in Coastal Marine Sediments: Comparison of Protocols for Determination and Ecological Significance. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.68.7.3509-3513.2002
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.