| Title |
Microbial nitrification in throughfall of a Japanese cedar associated with archaea from the tree canopy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-3286-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Keiji Watanabe, Ayato Kohzu, Wataru Suda, Shigeki Yamamura, Takejiro Takamatsu, Akio Takenaka, Masami Kanao Koshikawa, Seiji Hayashi, Mirai Watanabe |
| Abstract |
To investigate the nitrification potential of phyllospheric microbes, we incubated throughfall samples collected under the canopies of Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) and analyzed the transformation of inorganic nitrogen in the samples. Nitrate concentration increased in the unfiltered throughfall after 4 weeks of incubation, but remained nearly constant in the filtered samples (pore size: 0.2 and 0.4 µm). In the unfiltered samples, δ(18)O and δ(15)N values of nitrate decreased during incubation. In addition, archaeal ammonia monooxygenase subunit A (amoA) genes, which participate in the oxidation of ammonia, were found in the throughfall samples, although betaproteobacterial amoA genes were not detected. The amoA genes recovered from the leaf surface of C. japonica were also from archaea. Conversely, nitrate production, decreased isotope ratios of nitrate, and the presence of amoA genes was not observed in rainfall samples collected from an open area. Thus, the microbial nitrification that occurred in the incubated throughfall is likely due to ammonia-oxidizing archaea that were washed off the tree canopy by precipitation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 9 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,684,648
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#221
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,889
of 320,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#30
of 178 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 320,716 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 178 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.