| Title |
Difference of nitrogen-cycling microbes between shallow bay and deep-sea sediments in the South China Sea
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00253-017-8594-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tiantian Yu, Meng Li, Mingyang Niu, Xibei Fan, Wenyue Liang, Fengping Wang |
| Abstract |
In marine sediments, microorganisms are known to play important roles in nitrogen cycling; however, the composition and quantity of microbes taking part in each process of nitrogen cycling are currently unclear. In this study, two different types of marine sediment samples (shallow bay and deep-sea sediments) in the South China Sea (SCS) were selected to investigate the microbial community involved in nitrogen cycling. The abundance and composition of prokaryotes and seven key functional genes involved in five processes of the nitrogen cycle [nitrogen fixation, nitrification, denitrification, dissimilatory nitrate reduction to ammonium (DNRA), and anaerobic ammonia oxidation (anammox)] were presented. The results showed that a higher abundance of denitrifiers was detected in shallow bay sediments, while a higher abundance of microbes involved in ammonia oxidation, anammox, and DNRA was found in the deep-sea sediments. Moreover, phylogenetic differentiation of bacterial amoA, nirS, nosZ, and nrfA sequences between the two types of sediments was also presented, suggesting environmental selection of microbes with the same geochemical functions but varying physiological properties. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 9 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 14% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 16 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 October 2018.
All research outputs
#4,311,338
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#1,014
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,085
of 333,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#18
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. 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 333,353 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.