| Title |
Subterranean Desert Rodents (Genus Ctenomys) Create Soil Patches Enriched in Root Endophytic Fungal Propagules
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Microbial Ecology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00248-018-1227-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Victoria Miranda, Carolina Rothen, Natalia Yela, Adriana Aranda-Rickert, Johana Barros, Javier Calcagno, Sebastián Fracchia |
| Abstract |
Subterranean rodents are considered major soil engineers, as they can locally modify soil properties by their burrowing activities. In this study, the effect of a subterranean rodent of the genus Ctenomys on soil properties and root endophytic fungal propagules in a shrub desert of northwest Argentina was examined. Our main goal was to include among root endophytic fungi not only arbuscular mycorrhiza but also the dark septate endophytes. We compared the abundance of fungal propagules as well as several microbiological and physicochemical parameters between soils from burrows and those from the surrounding landscape. Our results show that food haulage, the deposition of excretions, and soil mixing by rodents' burrowing promote soil patchiness by (1) the enrichment in both types of root endophytic fungal propagules; (2) the increase in organic matter and nutrients; and (3) changes in soil edaphic properties including moisture, field capacity, and texture. These patches may play a critical role as a source of soil heterogeneity in desert ecosystems, where burrows constructed in interpatches of bare soil can act, once abandoned, as "islands of fertility," promoting the establishment of plants in an otherwise hostile environment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 27% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 42% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 21% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Microbial Ecology
#1,697
of 2,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,360
of 326,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbial Ecology
#34
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 326,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.