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

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

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 N 2 O 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 N 2 O-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 15 N 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.
Full text 1,999 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
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. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00