A primary aim of microbial ecology is to determine patterns and drivers of community distribution, interaction, and assembly amidst complexity and uncertainty. Microbial community composition has been shown to change across gradients of environment, geographic distance, salinity, temperature, oxygen, nutrients, pH, day length, and biotic factors 1-6 . These patterns have been identified mostly by focusing on one sample type and region at a time, with insights extra polated across environments and geography to produce generalized principles. To assess how microbes are distributed across environments globally-or whether microbial community dynamics follow funda mental ecological 'laws' at a planetary scale-requires either a massive monolithic cross environment survey or a practical methodology for coordinating many independent surveys. New studies of microbial environments are rapidly accumulating; however, our ability to extract meaningful information from across datasets is outstripped by the rate of data generation. Previous meta analyses have suggested robust gen eral trends in community composition, including the importance of salinity 1 and animal association 2 . These findings, although derived from relatively small and uncontrolled sample sets, support the util ity of meta analysis to reveal basic patterns of microbial diversity and suggest that a scalable and accessible analytical framework is needed.The Earth Microbiome Project (EMP, http://www.earthmicrobiome. org) was founded in 2010 to sample the Earth's microbial communities at an unprecedented scale in order to advance our understanding of the organizing biogeographic principles that govern microbial commu nity structure 7,8 . We recognized that open and collaborative science, including scientific crowdsourcing and standardized methods 8 , would help to reduce technical variation among individual studies, which can overwhelm biological variation and make general trends difficult to detect 9 . Comprising around 100 studies, over half of which have yielded peer reviewed publications (Supplementary Table 1), the EMP has now dwarfed by 100 fold the sampling and sequencing depth of earlier meta analysis efforts 1,2 ; concurrently, powerful analysis tools have been developed, opening a new and larger window into the distri bution of microbial diversity on Earth. In establishing a scalable frame work to catalogue microbiota globally, we provide both a resource for the exploration of myriad questions and a starting point for the guided acquisition of new data to answer them. As an example of using this Our growing awareness of the microbial world's importance and diversity contrasts starkly with our limited understanding of its fundamental structure. Despite recent advances in DNA sequencing, a lack of standardized protocols and common analytical frameworks impedes comparisons among studies, hindering the development of global inferences about microbial life on Earth. Here we present a meta-analysis of microbial community samples collected by hundreds of r...
Background In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. Methods This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation <92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg–800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12–24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04381936 ). Findings Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76–0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12–1·33; p<0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77–0·92; p<0·0001). Interpretation In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. Funding UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research.
Summary Litter decomposition is a biogeochemical process fundamental to element cycling within ecosystems, influencing plant productivity, species composition and carbon storage. Climate has long been considered the primary broad‐scale control on litter decomposition rates, yet recent work suggests that plant litter traits may predominate. Both decomposition paradigms, however, rely on inferences from cross‐biome litter decomposition studies that analyse site‐level means. We re‐analyse data from a classical cross‐biome study to demonstrate that previous research may falsely inflate the regulatory role of climate on decomposition and mask the influence of unmeasured local‐scale factors. Using the re‐analysis as a platform, we advocate experimental designs of litter decomposition studies that involve high within‐site replication, measurements of regulatory factors and processes at the same local spatial grain, analysis of individual observations and biome‐scale gradients. Synthesis. We question the assumption that climate is the predominant regulator of decomposition rates at broad spatial scales. We propose a framework for a new generation of studies focused on factoring local‐scale variation into the measurement and analysis of soil processes across broad scales. Such efforts may suggest a revised decomposition paradigm and ultimately improve confidence in the structure, parameter estimates and hence projections of biogeochemical models.
Mitigating climate change requires clean energy and removing atmospheric carbon. Building soil carbon is an appealing way to increase carbon sinks and reduce emissions due to the associated benefits to agriculture. However, practical implementation of soil carbon climate strategies lag behind the potential, partly because we lack clarity around the magnitude of opportunity and how to capitalize on it. Here we quantify the role of soil carbon in natural (landbased) climate solutions (NCS), and review some of the project design mechanisms available to tap into the potential. We show that soil carbon represents 25% of the 23.8 GtCO2eyr-1 NCS potential of which 40% is protection of existing soil carbon and 60% is rebuilding depleted stocks. Soil carbon comprises 9% of the mitigation potential of forests, 72% for wetlands, and 47% for agriculture and grasslands. Soil carbon is important to land-based efforts to prevent carbon emissions, remove atmospheric carbon dioxide and deliver ecosystem services in addition to climate mitigation. Protecting and restoring soil organic matter delivers many benefits to people and nature 1,2. Globally, soils hold three times more carbon than the atmosphere 3 , and the role of soil organic matter as a regulator of climate has been recognized by scientists for decades 4. Recent work has highlighted the historical loss of carbon from this pool 3 , and the threat of future accelerated loss under warming scenarios 4,5. Soil organic carbon as a natural climate solution (NCS) thus has a role both through restoring a carbon sink and protecting against further CO 2 emissions in response to predicted land use change and climate change. This dual role for soil in the global carbon budget suggests climate benefits can be achieved through strategies that both conserve existing soil organic carbon stocks (avoid loss), and restore stocks in carbon-depleted soils 6. There are important additional benefits. Protecting and increasing soil carbon storage can (i) protect or increase soil fertility, (ii) maintain or increase resilience to climate change, (iii) reduce soil erosion, and where implemented through conservation of natural ecosystems iv) reduce habitat conversion, all in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG's) 7 , the goals of the United Nationals Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification (UNCCD). As such, soil carbon is promoted as a common denominator amongst a variety of global and national initiatives 7. Although recent academic comment and perspective pieces point the way towards accelerated action on soils 8,9 , there remains much uncertainty around actionable pathways for achieving the global opportunity. Here we examine the scientific and policy context surrounding soil carbon projects, to aid prioritization and decision making.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.