MICROBIAL DIVERSITY IN SOIL: Selection of Microbial Populations by Plant and Soil Type and Implications for Disease Suppressiveness
Open accessAbstract
▪ Abstract An increasing interest has emerged with respect to the importance of microbial diversity in soil habitats. The extent of the diversity of microorganisms in soil is seen to be critical to the maintenance of soil health and quality, as a wide range of microorganisms is involved in important soil functions. This review focuses on recent data relating how plant type, soil type, and soil management regime affect the microbial diversity of soil and the implication for the soil's disease suppressiveness. The two main drivers of soil microbial community structure, i.e., plant type and soil type, are thought to exert their function in a complex manner. We propose that the fact that in some situations the soil and in others the plant type is the key factor determining soil microbial diversity is related to the complexity of the microbial interactions in soil, including interactions between microorganisms and soil and microorganisms and plants. A conceptual framework, based on the relative strengths of the shaping forces exerted by plant and soil versus the ecological behavior of microorganisms, is proposed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Soil is a highly heterogeneous and rich habitat with a plethora of niches and hosts a complex microbiome.
“Soil, in contrast, is a highly heterogeneous and rich habitat with a plethora of niches and thus hosts a complex microbiome [64].”
From Competition assays and physiological experiments of soil and phyllosphere yeasts identify Candida subhashii as a novel antagonist of filamentous fungi (2017) · cites this paper as [64]
Cites
Schmalenberger, A., & Tebbe, C. C. (2002) · FEMS Microbiology Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.2002.tb00933.x · Cited by 145 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The rhizosphere microbiome and plant health
Berendsen, R. L., Pieterse, C. M. J., & Bakker, P. A. H. M. (2012) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2012.04.001 · Cited by 5,347 · see citing works
Understanding and enhancing soil biological health: the solution for reversing soil degradation
Lehman, R., Cambardella, C., Stott, D., Acosta-Martinez, V., Manter, D., Buyer, J., Maul, J., Smith, J., Collins, H., Halvorson, J., et al. (2015) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su7010988 · Cited by 449 · see citing works
Siegel-Hertz, K., Edel-Hermann, V., Chapelle, E., Terrat, S., Raaijmakers, J. M., & Steinberg, C. (2018) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.00568 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
“…soil sterilization, steam pasteurization, or gammairradiation and can be transferred by mixing a small amount of natural suppressive soil into both previously disinfected suppressive soil and natural conducive soil (Alabouvette, 1986; Weller et al., 2002; Garbeva et al., 2004; Mendes et al., 2011).”
BackgroundHilber-Bodmer, M., Schmid, M., Ahrens, C. H., & Freimoser, F. M. (2017) · BMC Microbiology · doi:10.1186/s12866-016-0908-z · Cited by 106 · see citing works
“Soil, in contrast, is a highly heterogeneous and rich habitat with a plethora of niches and thus hosts a complex microbiome [64].”
Background
- Authors
- Garbeva, P., van Veen, J. A., & van Elsas, J. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Groningen (NL)
- Netherlands Institute of Ecology, NIOO-KNAW, Center for Terrestrial Ecology, Heteren, Netherlands
- ORCID
- Garbeva, P.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Phytopathology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2004-09-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 243-270
- ISSN
- 0066-4286 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2107
- OpenAlex
- W2135697951
- Cited by
- 1,458
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 96 · 2021: 109 · 2020: 111 · 2019: 95 · 2018: 79 · 2017: 98 · 2016: 80 · 2015: 79 · 2014: 77 · 2013: 65 · 2012: 74
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.wur.nl
- Locations
- Annual Review of Phytopathology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- KNAW research portal (Royal Academy of Art and Sciences (KNAW)) (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- KNAW Research Portal (The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
- Keywords
- soil microbial diversity, soil microbial community structure, soil type effects, soil management, disease suppression, plant-microbe interactions, soil health, microbial interactions, conceptual framework
- MeSH terms
- Agriculture, Animals, Bacteria, Fungi, Plant Diseases, Plants, Soil, Soil Microbiology, Ecosystem
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
