Back

Optimizing Carbon Sources to Promote Soil Denitrifiers: Lessons for Incubations, Enrichments, and Bioaugmentation

Sennett, L. B.; Caro-Pascual, A.; Dörsch, P.; Shapleigh, J. P.; Frostegard, A.

2025-12-18 microbiology
10.64898/2025.12.18.695110 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Oxygen concentrations fluctuate in soil across time and space. Under anoxic conditions, the three main microbial metabolic pathways - denitrification, fermentation, and DNRA - compete for the same carbon (C) sources. Studies on denitrification in complex soil communities often rely on incubation experiments to determine how various factors affect the regulatory biology of denitrifying organisms and their N2O emissions. These experiments typically require an exogenous C source to stimulate measurable activity, and the choice of C source is critical as it should support denitrification while minimizing competition from fermentation and DNRA. This consideration is equally important for the enrichment and isolation of diverse denitrifying organisms and for bioaugmentation-based N2O-mitigation strategies. Here, we compared twelve C sources, including glutamic acid, acetate, an artificial root exudate cocktail (eight compounds, individually and in combination), and a clover extract. By combining high-resolution denitrification gas kinetics, metagenomic sequencing, and 15N isotope labelling, we aimed to find a C source(s) that (1) supports a diverse soil-derived denitrifying community and (2) limits the competition for C from alternative anaerobic pathways. Among the tested substrates, only the clover extract supported denitrification and maintained a complex denitrifying community. Yet, it also promoted fermentation and DNRA, revealing that a trade-off must exist between fostering denitrifier diversity and limiting growth of organisms using competing anaerobic pathways. More broadly, our results highlight that C source is a methodological fulcrum in controlled soil microbiome studies. It shapes community composition, drives metabolic processes, and ultimately determines the ecological relevance of experimental outcomes and the success of enrichments and soil bioaugmentation approaches.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Soil Biology and Biochemistry
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
26.1%
2
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.3%
3
Microbiome
139 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.3%
4
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.9%
5
ISME Communications
103 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
The ISME Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.4%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 24%
3.7%
8
Environmental Microbiology
119 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.7%
9
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.7%
10
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
301 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.7%
11
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.1%
12
FEMS Microbes
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
13
Environmental Microbiology Reports
27 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.8%
15
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
17
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
18
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 39%
1.0%
19
Environmental Microbiome
26 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
20
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 31%
0.8%
21
Nature Microbiology
133 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 74%
0.8%
23
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
24
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
25
npj Biofilms and Microbiomes
56 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%