The field of microbiome research has evolved rapidly over the past few decades and has become a topic of great scientific and public interest. As a result of this rapid growth in interest covering different fields, we are lacking a clear commonly agreed definition of the term "microbiome." Moreover, a consensus on best practices in microbiome research is missing. Recently, a panel of international experts discussed the current gaps in the frame of the European-funded MicrobiomeSupport project. The meeting brought together about 40 leaders from diverse microbiome areas, while more than a hundred experts from all over the world took part in an online survey accompanying the workshop. This article excerpts the outcomes of the workshop and the corresponding online survey embedded in a short historical introduction and future outlook. We propose a definition of microbiome based on the compact, clear, and comprehensive description of the term provided by Whipps et al. in 1988, amended with a set of novel recommendations considering the latest technological developments and research findings. We clearly separate the terms microbiome and microbiota and provide a comprehensive discussion considering the composition of microbiota, the heterogeneity and dynamics of microbiomes in time and space, the stability and resilience of microbial networks, the definition of core microbiomes, and functionally relevant keystone species as well as co-evolutionary principles of microbe-host and inter-species interactions within the microbiome. These broad definitions together with the suggested unifying concepts will help to improve standardization of microbiome studies in the future, and could be the starting point for an integrated assessment of data resulting in a more rapid transfer of knowledge from basic science into practice. Furthermore, microbiome standards are important for solving new challenges associated with anthropogenic-driven changes in the field of planetary health, for which the understanding of microbiomes might play a key role.

Abstract. Ecosystem productivity commonly increases asymptotically with plant species diversity, and determining the mechanisms responsible for this well-known pattern is essential to predict potential changes in ecosystem productivity with ongoing species loss. Previous studies attributed the asymptotic diversity-productivity pattern to plant competition and differential resource use (e.g., niche complementarity). Using an analytical model and a series of experiments, we demonstrate theoretically and empirically that host-specific soil microbes can be major determinants of the diversity-productivity relationship in grasslands. In the presence of soil microbes, plant disease decreased with increasing diversity, and productivity increased nearly 500%, primarily because of the strong effect of density-dependent disease on productivity at low diversity. Correspondingly, disease was higher in plants grown in conspecific-trained soils than heterospecific-trained soils (demonstrating host-specificity), and productivity increased and host-specific disease decreased with increasing community diversity, suggesting that disease was the primary cause of reduced productivity in speciespoor treatments. In sterilized, microbe-free soils, the increase in productivity with increasing plant species number was markedly lower than the increase measured in the presence of soil microbes, suggesting that niche complementarity was a weaker determinant of the diversityproductivity relationship. Our results demonstrate that soil microbes play an integral role as determinants of the diversity-productivity relationship.

Soils suppressive to soilborne pathogens have been identified worldwide for almost 60 years and attributed mainly to suppressive or antagonistic microorganisms. Rather than identifying, testing and applying potential biocontrol agents in an inundative fashion, research into suppressive soils has attempted to understand how indigenous microbiomes can reduce disease, even in the presence of the pathogen, susceptible host, and favorable environment. Recent advances in next-generation sequencing of microbiomes have provided new tools to reexamine and further characterize the nature of these soils. Two general types of suppression have been described: specific and general suppression, and theories have been developed around these two models. In this review, we will present three examples of currently-studied model systems with features representative of specific and general suppressiveness: suppression to take-all (Gaeumannomyces graminis var. tritici), Rhizoctonia bare patch of wheat (Rhizoctonia solani AG-8), and Streptomyces. To compare and contrast the two models of general versus specific suppression, we propose a number of hypotheses about the nature and ecology of microbial populations and communities of suppressive soils. We outline the potential and limitations of new molecular techniques that can provide novel ways of testing these hypotheses. Finally, we consider how this greater understanding of the phytobiome can facilitate sustainable disease management in agriculture by harnessing the potential of indigenous soil microbes.