Extraction methods for untargeted metabolomics influence enzymatic activity in diverse soils
Science of The Total Environment, ISSN: 0048-9697, Vol: 828, Page: 154433
2022
- 10Citations
- 16Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations10
- Citation Indexes10
- 10
- CrossRef1
- Captures16
- Readers16
- 16
Article Description
Soil organic matter (SOM) is the largest carbon pool in terrestrial ecosystems and underpins the health and productivity of soil. Accurate characterization of its chemical composition will improve our understanding of biotic and abiotic processes regulating its stabilization. Our purpose in this study was to estimate the loss of SOM by microbial and exoenzymatic activity that might occur when soil is extracted for analysis of representative low molecular weight mass features using untargeted metabolomics. Two mined clays (kaolinite, montmorillonite) and three diverse soils (varying in texture, specific surface area and cation exchange capacity) were used to assess the extraction efficiency and loss of three enzymatic activity indicators (2,6-dichloroindophenol sodium salt hydrate [DCIP], 4-methylumbelliferyl phosphate [MUBph] and 3,4-dihydroxy- L -phenylalanine [LDOPA]) during extraction with two different solvents (water and methanol). Losses of the indicators were attributed to extraction method (ultrasonication, shaking, or shaking following chloroform fumigation), physical properties associated with the soil/clay type, and microbial activity. Soil/clay type strongly influenced indicator recovery and hence, SOM recovery. Choice of extraction method strongly influenced the composition and recovery of representative SOM mass features, while the choice of solvent determined whether the soil type or extraction method had a greater influence of compositional differences in the SOM mass features extracted. Extraction following chloroform fumigation had the greatest loss of the indicators, due to enzymatic activity and/or adsorption onto the soil matrix. Minimal variation in composition and loss of SOM mass features occurred during extraction by shaking for the soils tested; we therefore recommend it as the method of choice for untargeted SOM extraction studies.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722015261; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154433; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85126292934&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35276180; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0048969722015261; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154433
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know