↓ Skip to main content

Plant Microbiomes: Do Different Preservation Approaches and Primer Sets Alter Our Capacity to Assess Microbial Diversity and Community Composition?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, July 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
38 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Plant Microbiomes: Do Different Preservation Approaches and Primer Sets Alter Our Capacity to Assess Microbial Diversity and Community Composition?
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, July 2020
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2020.00993
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhiguang Qiu, Juntao Wang, Manuel Delgado-Baquerizo, Pankaj Trivedi, Eleonora Egidi, Yi-Min Chen, Haiyang Zhang, Brajesh K. Singh

Abstract

The microbial communities associated with plants (the plant microbiome) play critical roles in regulating plant health and productivity. Because of this, in recent years, there have been significant increase in studies targeting the plant microbiome. Amplicon sequencing is widely used to investigate the plant microbiome and to develop sustainable microbial agricultural tools. However, performing large microbiome surveys at the regional and global scales pose several logistic challenges. One of these challenges is related with the preservation of plant materials for sequencing aiming to maintain the integrity of the original diversity and community composition of the plant microbiome. Another significant challenge involves the existence of multiple primer sets used in amplicon sequencing that, especially for bacterial communities, hampers the comparability of datasets across studies. Here, we aimed to examine the effect of different preservation approaches (snap freezing, fresh and kept on ice, and air drying) on the bacterial and fungal diversity and community composition on plant leaves, stems and roots from seven plant species from contrasting functional groups (e.g. C3, C4, N-Fixers, etc.). Another major challenge comes when comparing plant to soil microbiomes, as different primers sets are often used for plant vs. soil microbiomes. Thus, we also investigated if widely used 16S rRNA primer set (779F/1193R) for plant microbiome studies provides comparable data to those often used for soil microbiomes (341F/805R) using 86 soil samples. We found that the community composition and diversity of bacteria or fungi were robust to contrasting preservation methods. The primer sets often used for plants provided similar results to those often used for soil studies suggesting that simultaneous studies on plant and soil microbiomes are possible. Our findings provide novel evidence that preservation approaches do not significantly impact plant microbiome data interpretation and primer differences do not impact the treatment effect, which has significant implication for future large-scale and global surveys of plant microbiomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 20%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,886,263
of 26,168,182 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#653
of 25,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,428
of 434,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#19
of 570 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,168,182 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,022 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 434,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 570 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.