Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 435

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Populus holobiont: dissecting the effects of plant niches and genotype on the microbiome

Open access
Cregger, M. A., Veach, A. M., Yang, Z. K., Crouch, M. J., Vilgalys, R., Tuskan, G. A., Schadt, C. W.·2018·Microbiome

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Microorganisms serve important functions within numerous eukaryotic host organisms. An understanding of the variation in the plant niche-level microbiome, from rhizosphere soils to plant canopies, is imperative to gain a better understanding of how both the structural and functional processes of microbiomes impact the health of the overall plant holobiome. Using Populus trees as a model ecosystem, we characterized the archaeal/bacterial and fungal microbiome across 30 different tissue-level niches within replicated Populus deltoides and hybrid Populus trichocarpa × deltoides individuals using 16S and ITS2 rRNA gene analyses. RESULTS: Our analyses indicate that archaeal/bacterial and fungal microbiomes varied primarily across broader plant habitat classes (leaves, stems, roots, soils) regardless of plant genotype, except for fungal communities within leaf niches, which were greatly impacted by the host genotype. Differences between tree genotypes are evident in the elevated presence of two potential fungal pathogens, Marssonina brunnea and Septoria sp., on hybrid P. trichocarpa × deltoides trees which may in turn be contributing to divergence in overall microbiome composition. Archaeal/bacterial diversity increased from leaves, to stem, to root, and to soil habitats, whereas fungal diversity was the greatest in stems and soils. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a holistic understanding of microbiome structure within a bioenergy relevant plant host, one of the most complete niche-level analyses of any plant. As such, it constitutes a detailed atlas or map for further hypothesis testing on the significance of individual microbial taxa within specific niches and habitats of Populus and a baseline for comparisons to other plant species.

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 · 10.1186/s40168-018-0413-8

Cites

48 of 48 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 48 references

Cited by

See all 435

Metadata

Authors
Cregger, M. A., Veach, A. M., Yang, Z. K., Crouch, M. J., Vilgalys, R., Tuskan, G. A., & Schadt, C. W.
Venue
Microbiome
Published
2018-02-12
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
31-31
ISSN
2049-2618 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2790398928
Cited by
435
References
48
FWCI
32.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: The Populus holobiont: dissecting the effects of plant niches and genotype on the microbiome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s40168-018-0413-8
The paper
Cregger, M. A., Veach, A. M., Yang, Z. K., Crouch, M. J., Vilgalys, R., Tuskan, G. A., & Schadt, C. W. (2018). The Populus holobiont: dissecting the effects of plant niches and genotype on the microbiome. Microbiome. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-018-0413-8

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.