Abstract
The resident microbiota in agricultural soils strongly influences crop health and productivity. In this study, we evaluated the prokaryotic diversity of two clay soils with similar physicochemical characteristics but contrasting levels of maize (Zea mays L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Yield records showed significant differences in grain production over five consecutive years. When comparing prokaryotic alpha diversity between the “non-productive” and “productive” soils, no major differences were found, and the abundance of ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) and bacterial genera such as Arthrobacter, Neobacillus, and Microvirga remained consistent across soils. Analysis of the top 20 genera showing the greatest abundance shifts by compartment (bulk soil vs. rhizosphere) revealed that genera such as Priestia, Neobacillus, Sporosarcina, and Pontibacter decreased in the rhizosphere of the non-productive soil, while in the productive soil, these genera remained unchanged. In the non-productive soil, genera such as Flavisobacter decreased in abundance in the rhizosphere, whereas Arthrobacter increased. Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) showed no clear clustering by compartment (bulk vs. rhizosphere), but two distinct clusters emerged when grouping by soil type (productive vs. non-productive). Interaction networks varied by soil type: non-productive soils showed positive Candidatus–Bacillus and negative Massilia links, while productive soils were dominated by Flavisolibacter and negative Pontibacter. Across soils, Rhizobium–Bradyrhizobium associations were positive, whereas Neobacillus and Priestia were negative. These findings highlight that a few potential beneficial microbiota and their interactions may be key drivers of soil productivity, representing targets for microbiome-based agricultural management.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 14
Claim · model-written summary
Prokaryotic alpha diversity showed no major difference between productive and non-productive soils.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e1“When comparing prokaryotic alpha diversity between the “non-productive” and “productive” soils, no major differences were found”
Claim · model-written summary
Ammonia-oxidizing archaea and genera such as Arthrobacter, Neobacillus, and Microvirga remained consistent across soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e2“the abundance of ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) and bacterial genera such as Arthrobacter, Neobacillus, and Microvirga remained consistent across soils”
Claim · model-written summary
Priestia, Neobacillus, Sporosarcina, and Pontibacter decreased in the rhizosphere of the non-productive soil.
- Outcome
- Priestia, Neobacillus, Sporosarcina, and Pontibactere3
- Direction
- decreasede3
- Setting
- rhizosphere of the non-productive soile3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e3“genera such as Priestia, Neobacillus, Sporosarcina, and Pontibacter decreased in the rhizosphere of the non-productive soil, while in the productive soil, these genera remained unchanged”
Claim · model-written summary
These genera remained unchanged in the rhizosphere of the productive soil.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e3“genera such as Priestia, Neobacillus, Sporosarcina, and Pontibacter decreased in the rhizosphere of the non-productive soil, while in the productive soil, these genera remained unchanged”
Claim · model-written summary
Flavisobacter decreased in abundance in the rhizosphere of the non-productive soil.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e4“In the non-productive soil, genera such as Flavisobacter decreased in abundance in the rhizosphere, whereas Arthrobacter increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Arthrobacter increased in the rhizosphere of the non-productive soil.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e4“In the non-productive soil, genera such as Flavisobacter decreased in abundance in the rhizosphere, whereas Arthrobacter increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Two distinct clusters emerged when samples were grouped by soil type.
- Outcome
- two distinct clusters emerged when grouping by soil typee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e5“Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) showed no clear clustering by compartment (bulk vs. rhizosphere), but two distinct clusters emerged when grouping by soil type (productive vs. non-productive)”
Claim · model-written summary
PCoA showed no clear clustering by compartment, bulk soil versus rhizosphere.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e5“Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) showed no clear clustering by compartment (bulk vs. rhizosphere), but two distinct clusters emerged when grouping by soil type (productive vs. non-productive)”
Claim · model-written summary
Candidatus–Bacillus association was positive in the non-productive soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e6“non-productive soils showed positive Candidatus–Bacillus and negative Massilia links, while productive soils were dominated by Flavisolibacter and negative Pontibacter”
Claim · model-written summary
Massilia association was negative in the non-productive soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e6“non-productive soils showed positive Candidatus–Bacillus and negative Massilia links, while productive soils were dominated by Flavisolibacter and negative Pontibacter”
Claim · model-written summary
Pontibacter association was negative in the productive soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e6“non-productive soils showed positive Candidatus–Bacillus and negative Massilia links, while productive soils were dominated by Flavisolibacter and negative Pontibacter”
Claim · model-written summary
Flavisolibacter dominated the bacterial network in the productive soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e6“non-productive soils showed positive Candidatus–Bacillus and negative Massilia links, while productive soils were dominated by Flavisolibacter and negative Pontibacter”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium–Bradyrhizobium associations were positive across soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e7“Across soils, Rhizobium–Bradyrhizobium associations were positive, whereas Neobacillus and Priestia were negative”
Claim · model-written summary
Neobacillus and Priestia were negatively associated across soils.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.) Grown in Soils with Contrasting Productivity Levels”
e7“Across soils, Rhizobium–Bradyrhizobium associations were positive, whereas Neobacillus and Priestia were negative”