↓ Skip to main content

A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Anaerobic Soil Disinfestation on Pest Suppression and Yield of Horticultural Crops

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Anaerobic Soil Disinfestation on Pest Suppression and Yield of Horticultural Crops
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2016.01254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Utsala Shrestha, Robert M. Augé, David M. Butler

Abstract

Anaerobic soil disinfestation (ASD) is a proven but relatively new strategy to control soil borne pests of horticultural crops through anaerobic decomposition of organic soil amendments. The ASD technique has primarily been used to control soil borne pathogens; however, this technique has also shown potential to control plant parasitic nematodes and weeds. ASD can utilize a broad range of carbon (C) amendments and optimization may improve efficacy across environments. In this context, a meta-analysis using a random-effects model was conducted to determine effect sizes of the ASD effect on soil borne pathogens (533 studies), plant parasitic nematodes (91 studies), and weeds (88 studies) compared with unamended controls. Yield response to ASD was evaluated (123 studies) compared to unamended and fumigated controls. We also examined moderator variables for environmental conditions and amendments to explore the impact of these moderators on ASD effectiveness on pests and yield. Across all pathogen types with the exception of Sclerotinia spp., ASD studies show suppression of bacterial, oomycete and fungal pathogens (59 to 94%). Pathogen suppression was effective under all environmental conditions (50 to 94%) and amendment types (53 to 97%), except when amendments were applied at rates less than 0.3 kg m(-2). The ASD effect ranged from 15 to 56% for nematode suppression and 32 to 81% for weed suppression, but these differences were not significant. Significant nematode moderators included study type, soil type, sampling depth, incubation period, and use of mixed amendments. Weed suppression due to ASD showed significant heterogeneity for all environmental conditions, confirming that these studies do not share a common effect size. Total crop yield was not reduced by ASD when compared to a fumigant control and yield was significantly higher (30%) compared to an unamended control, suggesting ASD as a feasible option to maintain yield without chemical soil fumigants. We conclude ASD is effective against soil borne pathogens and while not conclusive due to a limited number of studies, we expect the same for nematodes and weeds given observed effect sizes. Findings should assist researchers in exploring ASD efficacy in particular environmental conditions and allow for development of standard treatment protocols.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 23 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 47%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Psychology 2 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 29 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,729,323
of 23,498,099 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#5,047
of 21,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,478
of 340,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#92
of 443 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,498,099 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,513 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 340,728 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 443 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.