Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40304530›Full record

ArticlemSphere2025

Rhizosphere-colonizing bacteria persist in the protist microbiome.

Stephen J Taerum, Ravikumar R Patel, Justin E Alamo, Daniel Gage, Blaire Steven, Lindsay R Triplett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSphere, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Stephen J TaerumDepartment of Plant Pathology and Ecology, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Ravikumar R PatelDepartment of Plant Pathology and Ecology, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7891-6903
Justin E AlamoDepartment of Plant Pathology and Ecology, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Daniel GageDepartment of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3207-7163
Blaire StevenDepartment of Environmental Science and Forestry, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5940-2432
Lindsay R TriplettDepartment of Plant Pathology and Ecology, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5560-9257

Funding

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2022-67013-37144
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Soils contain diverse predatory protists that affect the abundance and behavior of rhizosphere bacteria, including bacteria that may benefit plant health. Protists harbor their own bacterial microbiomes, and we previously observed that plants inoculated with protists harbored rhizosphere bacteria similar to those in the protist inoculum. To determine how protist microbiomes affect the rhizosphere, we profiled the bacteria of eight diverse rhizosphere protist isolates after 2 years of laboratory culture. We then compared the protist culture microbiomes to maize rhizosphere communities 6 weeks after protist inoculation. Introduction of protists enriched 13 protist-associated bacterial amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) in the rhizosphere, which comprised ~10% of the rhizosphere bacterial community. Additional bacterial ASVs ranked highly in abundance in both rhizosphere (top 100) and protist (top 20) microbiomes; together, a median 47% of the protist microbiome was enriched or in high rank abundance in the rhizosphere. Inoculation with three out of eight protist cultures positively affected root biomass traits, but a protist mixture had no effect, indicating that the impact of protist-associated bacteria on plant growth is context dependent. Isolates of protist-associated bacteria had both positive and negative effects on protist growth in culture, suggesting that the bacteria use multiple strategies to survive in proximity to predators. This study demonstrates that even after long-term laboratory culture, rhizosphere protist cultures host bacteria that can colonize the rhizosphere of maize. The findings also identify diverse groups of rhizosphere-colonizing bacteria that persist among protist predators, which suggests that these bacteria could associate with or benefit from protists in the soil. IMPORTANCE: Understanding the impact of predatory protists on the plant microbiome will be essential to deploy protists in sustainable agriculture. This study shows that eight rhizosphere protist isolates hosted diverse and distinct bacterial communities and that a large proportion of these bacteria could be found colonizing the maize root environment 6 weeks after protists were inoculated onto seedlings. This study demonstrates that certain bacteria from the maize rhizosphere can persist for years in protist cultures and retain the ability to colonize rhizosphere soil, suggesting that protists might support the survival of these rhizosphere bacteria in the absence of the plant.

Indexed as

BacteriaEukaryotaMicrobiotaRhizosphereSoil MicrobiologyPlant RootsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SZea maysRNA, Ribosomal, 16SColpodamaizemicrobiomeprotistrhizosphere

Identifiers

PMID40304530
PMCPMC12108058

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.