
==== Front
J Biol Eng
J Biol Eng
Journal of Biological Engineering
1754-1611
BioMed Central London

39256848
444
10.1186/s13036-024-00444-1
Correspondence
Soil microbiome characterization and its future directions with biosensing
DeFord Lexi 1
Yoon Jeong-Yeol jyyoon@arizona.edu

12
1 https://ror.org/03m2x1q45 grid.134563.6 0000 0001 2168 186X Department of Biosystems Engineering, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA
2 https://ror.org/03m2x1q45 grid.134563.6 0000 0001 2168 186X Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA
10 9 2024
10 9 2024
2024
18 5023 4 2024
22 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Soil microbiome characterization is typically achieved with next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques. Metabarcoding is very common, and meta-omics is growing in popularity. These techniques have been instrumental in microbiology, but they have limitations. They require extensive time, funding, expertise, and computing power to be effective. Moreover, these techniques are restricted to controlled laboratory conditions; they are not applicable in field settings, nor can they rapidly generate data. This hinders using NGS as an environmental monitoring tool or an in-situ checking device. Biosensing technology can be applied to soil microbiome characterization to overcome these limitations and to complement NGS techniques. Biosensing has been used in biomedical applications for decades, and many successful commercial products are on the market. Given its previous success, biosensing has much to offer soil microbiome characterization. There is a great variety of biosensors and biosensing techniques, and a few in particular are better suited for soil field studies. Aptamers are more stable than enzymes or antibodies and are more ready for field-use biosensors. Given that any microbiome is complex, a multiplex sensor will be needed, and with large, complicated datasets, machine learning might benefit these analyses. If the signals from the biosensors are optical, a smartphone can be used as a portable optical reader and potential data-analyzing device. Biosensing is a rich field that couples engineering and biology, and applying its toolset to help advance soil microbiome characterization would be a boon to microbiology more broadly.

Keywords

Soil health
Soil microbiome
Biosensor
Aptamer
Machine learning
issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Soil is the foundation of all terrestrial environments; it can harbor billions of microbes per gram [1] and plays critical roles in nutrient availability, biogeochemical cycling, and bioremediation processes. Despite its importance, the soil is perhaps the least understood part of the environment [2]. Characterizing its physical and chemical properties has been essential for agriculture for thousands of years. However, soil’s biological component has generally been overlooked until the past few centuries, and even then, scientists were usually limited to studying macrofauna like earthworms and small insects. The invention of optical microscopes powerful enough to resolve microorganisms enabled the visual study of microbes [3]. Only recently, with advances in sequencing and “meta-omics” technologies, have scientists been able to investigate soil microbes and their communities comprehensively. Today, there are many ways to determine various physical and chemical properties of soil and several metrics to evaluate soil quality as a whole. However, many soil quality metrics do not consider microbial community factors [4] despite their noted importance [4, 5]. The omission of community factors in these metrics is partly due to the difficulties of biological characterization. Determining what microorganisms are present is possible through next-generation sequencing (NGS), and though these methods have advantages over traditional culturing methods, NGS is not without its drawbacks. Moreover, knowing the microbes’ functions is often essential, requiring different data with separate analysis methods. It can be challenging to interpret the large amounts of data generated by NGS, particularly when gaps remain in the databases used for analysis. Because of these challenges, many papers have called for developing novel techniques to complement NGS methods [6–11], and biosensing may offer an excellent suite of tools to do just that.

Biosensing has been defined as “a device that uses specific biochemical reactions mediated by isolated enzymes, immunosystems, tissues, organelles, or whole cells to detect chemical compounds usually by electrical, thermal or optical signals” by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) [12]. In essence, biosensing detects a target compound or condition using some biological component. Such devices are often used in biomedical applications [13–18] and ecotoxicology [19–21]. Many biosensor studies use entire organisms to sense the target compound or condition [16, 19, 22–28], but other studies instead use only specific molecules without the surrounding cellular structure [11, 14, 15, 29, 30]. These molecules, or bioreceptors, are essential components in biosensing devices and are often the focal points of research.

Numerous research works and commercialization efforts have been made in the past couple of decades for biosensors, most notably toward reducing the device size, device cost, assay time, operation cost, and operation complexity while maintaining specificity and sensitivity comparable to more standard laboratory instruments. Such biosensing methods and biosensor devices may identify microbial species and their makeup in the soil, significantly reducing the cost and time associated with NGS methods. However, biosensors are inherently limited in specificity compared to NGS in identifying species. Substantial cross-binding can occur with antibody- or aptamer-based bacterial biosensing. In addition, biosensing may not be optimal for identifying a large number of species simultaneously. For example, detecting 100 microbial species could require 100 different bioreceptors pre-loaded on a biosensing platform, significantly augmenting the assay complexity and limiting its usefulness compared to current NGS technology.

This correspondence paper aims to summarize current methods and techniques for soil microbiome characterization and then to summarize and provide insights and recommendations for future opportunities with biosensing technologies. See Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 for visual overviews of these two technologies. These steps are described in detail in the following sections.Fig. 1 Overview of next-generation sequencing (NGS) process. Amplicon-based methods include the amplification step, while shotgun methods instead include DNA fragmentation. Figure created with BioRender.com

Fig. 2 Overview of biosensing process as potentially applied to soil microbiome characterization. Figure created with BioRender.com

Soil microbiome characterization

In its entirety, the microbiome encompasses all the parameters that make up a community of microbes. This includes physical, chemical, and biological characteristics, but we will focus on the biological characteristics, like the microbial community dynamics and structure, for this correspondence paper.

Intrinsically, soil is a difficult medium to work with because of its physical properties. Soil is an opaque mixture, which significantly limits the use of optical microscopy techniques. Soil is also very spatially heterogeneous. Depth significantly affects parameters like moisture and the carbon–nitrogen ratio [31]. Also, roots create a unique environment rich in metabolites and signaling molecules; this environment is called the rhizosphere and is a critical region of plant–microbe interaction and symbiosis [23, 32–34]. There is spatial heterogeneity even at the microscale, such as an uneven distribution of nutrients, organisms, and microclimate conditions across millimeters or shorter distances [35]. This heterogeneity complicates soil analyses because average properties could be misleading for understanding microscale interactions [8]; however, measuring microscale properties is technically challenging. Lastly, soil properties can be time-dependent. Not only can soil parameters change across seasons, but the day-night fluctuations can be significant, along with the short-term disturbance or perturbation [36–38]. In addition, many of its components influence each other; no soil properties are genuinely independent [39]. There is also no “standard” or baseline for soil properties, complicating soil comparison studies [7]. Nonetheless, scientists can make loose comparisons within a soil type, which is characterized by physical parameters and geological history. Finally, most soil testing is destructive, so measuring any parameter over time for the same soil sample is generally impossible. This limits data to be snap-shots instead of continuous [40].

The obstacles listed above are mostly matrix effects, so the first option when characterizing microbes from the soil is to try to remove those effects as much as possible. Many studies have done this when working with soil or other complex matrices like feces [19, 24, 41–45]. Liquid extraction of soil is a common method to remove matrix effects. The sample is usually sieved through a 2-mm sieve to remove larger dirt particles and small rocks or leaves [46–49]. Then, the soil is incubated in a liquid medium, and the supernatant is extracted for further analysis. However, liquid extraction does not extract all of the microbes, and moreover, the precise method of transport to the lab and any pre-treatments can significantly affect the microbes detected by NGS [50, 51]. The sample could also be digested via chemical and mechanical means to create a homogeneous solution; there are many commercial kits available for this purpose that have been widely used in research for many years [4–6, 24, 25, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, 44, 46, 47, 50, 52–71]. There are many different brands and products available, including FastDNA SPIN kits from MP Biomedicals, EZNA DNA kits from Omega Bio-tek, DNeasy Power kits from Qiagen, NuceloSpin kits from Macherey–Nagel, ZymoBIOMICS DNA kits from Zymbo Research, and INTEST.pro kits from BIOMES. Specific products are usually tailored to detect particular types of organisms from particular matrices or environments. Even with these kits, soil remains a difficult medium to work with. Until there are standardized procedures for soil analysis, various kits should be considered for different soil samples because each has its biases, pros, and cons [50, 72–74].

After dealing with matrix effects and generating a sample for further analysis, the microbes can begin to be characterized, and culturing in growth media is the traditional method for this. Different colony morphologies or absorbance characteristics can be detected for characterization. In addition, culturing allows for functional or biofilm assays in the selected presence or absence of various metabolites or conditions [4, 55, 64, 72, 75]. However, many, if not most, microbes resist culturing in lab settings [76], even though many different growth media and methods have been created and used over the years. For example, the media could be missing a critical nutrient that the microbe cannot make on its own, or the growth of one species could depend on the presence of another [25, 77, 78]. Different microbes also have specific temperature, pH, moisture, oxygen, and salt concentration requirements that can be unknown before culture [76].

Some recent advances in ‘culturomics’ for soil microbes include modifying the particle size fractions and culturing in microwell plates. Such advances mimic natural spatial conditions in which organisms are separated and attached to various micro-surfaces like soil particles [76]. There are also novel in situ devices that allow natural media to permeate a membrane or filter where the microbes have been inoculated [79, 80]. These and other advances in culture techniques have enabled more species to be grown in lab settings, and indeed, these techniques will remain a central part of microbiology. Even so, sequencing technologies can overcome many of these challenges and are vital to microbiology.

Brief overview of sequencing technologies

Today, there are several different ways to sequence DNA. But, at the beginning of sequencing efforts, generating even one short DNA read was very laborious. Then, “next-generation sequencing” (NGS) arrived, which has become pivotal to microbiome research. It enabled the mass parallelization of sequencing reactions, even though read lengths were limited to several hundred base pairs. With these technologies, many strands of DNA could be read at once, which greatly shortened the time required to read lots of DNA. Then there were the “third generation sequencing” technologies which would enable longer read lengths (hundreds of thousands of base pairs) [81, 82]. Longer read lengths are especially useful for sequencing entire genomes; with longer reads there are fewer sequences to stitch together to create the whole genome. Together, these sequencing technologies exposed scientists to the wealth of previously unculturable microbes since a raw environmental sample could be sequenced without culturing and without years of work to generate one sequence. While many NGS technologies are currently in use, a few representative technologies have been selected for a comparison of their key characteristics along with strengths and weaknesses in Table 1. Table 1 Selected current NGS technologies with their strengths and weaknesses. Adapted from [81]

Sequencing technology	Time of use, hours	Cost of machine, USD	Approximate machine size	Strengths	Weaknesses	
Illumina:

Sequence by synthesisa

Fluorescent detection

	4–56	19,900–335,000	Benchtop or standalone	High accuracy

Good depth of coverage

	Requires library preparation & assembly

Long run times

	
ThermoFisher:

Sequence by synthesis

Ion Torrent detection

	4.4–31	On request	Benchtop or standalone	High accuracy

Good depth of coverage

	Requires library preparation & assembly

Long run times

	
Pacific Biosciences:

Single molecule sequencing

Fluorescent detection

	 < 30	525,000	Standalone	Long read length

No amplification necessary

Fast run times

	Expensive

Large footprint

Higher error rateb

	
Oxford Nanopore: Single molecule sequencing

Conductivity detection

	 < 72	1,400–530,000	Portable or benchtop	Long read length

No amplification necessary

Fast run times

Portable instruments are available

Real-time analysis is possible

	Higher error rateb

Higher signal-to-noise ratio

Errors are systematicc

	
Sequencing technologies in general	 < 72	1,400–530,000	Portable, benchtop, or standalone	Accuracy

Mature technology

	Time

Cost

Portability

Requires lab conditions & reagents

	
aSequence by synthesizing new DNA molecules

bThese technologies have historically had higher error rates, but they continue to improve

cSystematic errors cannot be easily mitigated with increased coverage and thus are more challenging to resolve in practice

As sequencing technologies grew and matured, more organisms were sequenced, from bacteria and fungi to the less studied archaea and viruses. These genes and genomes were collected and deposited into massive databases, allowing molecular evolutionary testing and visualization. These databases also enabled sequence reads of unknown species to be matched and labeled; culturing was no longer a prerequisite to determine what species were present in a sample [83, 84]. In addition, with functional data from cultures, scientists could identify genes responsible for proteins that make up enzymes in metabolic pathways. Thus, just from the organisms’ genes, microbiologists could make guesses about an organism’s functional capabilities, its role in a community, and its responses to various types of stress [85]. The importance of these advances should not be understated; they make the field of microbiology what it is today.

“-Omics”

NGS is a cornerstone of microbiology, and there are several ways to use NGS. Perhaps the simplest application of NGS is to look at one gene from one organism. For example, there are several tests for oncogenes in humans [86, 87]. Though this is much more difficult for microorganisms, single-cell sequencing technologies do exist [88]. However, this approach only lets scientists learn about one part of one individual; it does not provide a full picture of one organism, nor is this approach suitable for community analysis.

To understand the individual more fully, scientists can look at all the genes in one individual, called genomics. Such an approach could be useful if one species is determined to be a keystone or indicator species for a microbiome. The genome can be very insightful for determining the potential function of an organism. However, the presence of genes alone does not guarantee that they function at all or as expected [89]. Analyzing all of the messenger RNA (mRNA) is a better way to determine gene activity, while characterizing the proteins or metabolites produced by an organism is a more concrete way to assess its functional ability [90]. These fields of study are called transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, respectively, and together with genomics, represent the core of the broader -omics field.

Ideally, each species study would include all of these -omics, but that is not feasible. There are general time and money limitations, but besides those, each -omics investigates different molecule types that work on different time scales and require different extraction and analysis methods [74]. In particular, proteomics and metabolomics commonly involve mass spectrometry [15, 37, 40, 77, 85, 91, 92], a highly technical and precise method requiring many non-standardized pre-processing steps. In addition, it is also difficult to compare mass spectrometry results across laboratories because their results depend on the previously tested libraries of molecules for that specific mass spectrometry machine and sample pre-processing method [93].

Metabarcoding

Since -omics is focused on the individual, a more suitable application of NGS for microbiome research is metabarcoding, which looks at the breadth of the community and how its members are related phylogenetically. Metabarcoding uses specific sequences to identify what species are present and how they are related. This is typically done using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to amplify an identifier gene like the 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) or internal transcribed spacer (ITS) gene throughout the sample (Fig. 1). Thus, the other genes are ignored, and only taxonomic information is extracted for analysis. However, care must be taken when selecting not only the DNA extraction method [44] but also the PCR primers, which can affect what taxa are detected and in what relative abundances [58, 74]. Since primers can internally differentiate some groups better than others, they inherently have more or less affinity for specific species or taxa. For example, for looking at fungi, amplifying part or all of the ITS gene is more useful than the 16S rRNA gene, while for bacteria, the 16S rRNA gene works well, though there are several variable regions to choose from [44].

After PCR, the amplified DNA is sequenced via one of several different sequencing technologies, each with its strengths and weaknesses (Table 1). Examining these methods is outside the scope of this review (the main emphasis is biosensing methods), but some excellent reviews have been completed [81, 94]. The sequence data must be processed via bioinformatics pathways. Again, there are many different ways to do this, and analyzing them all is outside the scope of this review. Finally, a collection of cleaned and annotated reads is returned to the user, and the scientist can see which taxa are present and in what relative abundances. However, these taxa are often not identified at the species level [95, 96].

After metabarcoding and omics data are generated, they must be analyzed. The chosen bioinformatics pathway will affect the analysis. In the past, these pathways were not standardized, though there are now substantial efforts to enhance standardization across labs and organizations [97]. Still, one drawback of metabarcoding and omics remains: they often rely on data collected from culture. Current data analysis tools often depend on previously studied organisms [7]; however, modern bioinformatics tools enable less reliance on culture data, and in some cases, genomes can be constructed de novo without prior knowledge of the organisms [98]. Still, culturing remains a critical technique, and advances must be made in that field to address the more intractable taxa.

Meta-Omics

For soil microbiome characterization, metabarcoding only gives scientists insight on what taxa or species are present; it does not give direct insight on what they are doing or how. To find out, scientists will study the -omics of many microbes, which introduces “meta-omics,” in which community-wide data is taken and studied in aggregate. For example, metatranscriptomics looks at the mRNA of a community, metaproteomics looks at the proteins in a community, metabolomics looks at the metabolites in a community, and metagenomics looks at all the genomes in a community. Excellent reviews of these meta-omics have been published [99–103], and in this section, metagenomics will be used as an example of meta-omics use more broadly and its limitations.

Metagenomics is a zoomed-out view of genes and their potential functions in a microbiome. Microbiologists can look at the distribution of classes of genes throughout time or by taxa, or they can compare one metagenome from one community to another. However, meta-omics inherits many limitations of -omics, primarily related to feasibility. The sequence depth must be sufficiently deep to detect all of the genes of an entire community; a lot of DNA must be sequenced to get adequate coverage. Gathering this much DNA requires more precise pre-processing steps of the sample, and even so, detecting genes and genomes at low abundances is still challenging [104]. Meta-omics, like -omics, involves lots of data that require significant computing power to analyze, and this, rather than the ability to sequence, is now regarded as the limiting step for metagenomics studies [72], and several machine learning models have been developed for these analyses [60, 71, 85, 105–107]. In addition, meta-omics methods are not standardized, so comparing meta-omics data across labs is challenging because the pipelines are different, both for data generation and processing [72]. Lastly, as with -omics, even though culturing is not required to gather data, the analysis generally relies on previous culture data for labeling and interpretation; however, some de novo bioinformatics tools have been developed and tested to circumvent using any culture data [83, 84].

There are also more general obstacles to environmental sequence or molecule studies. Firstly, most of these technologies require the samples to be taken to a lab and processed in a clean environment; these methods are neither fast nor suitable for point-of-care or in-situ monitoring programs. Also, meta-omics methods are typically too expensive for every lab to have access to them. Moreover, since DNA is relatively stable and can be bound up in inorganic complexes in the soil, DNA from dead organisms can be found and mistakenly interpreted as if it were from living organisms [108]. However, treatments like propidium monoazide can remove relic DNA from a sample [109, 110]. Finally, standard NGS only provides relative abundance data; to determine absolute abundance, techniques like quantitative PCR (qPCR), digital PCR, or spike-ins with known microbial concentration are required [111].

Biosensing technology

Researchers have long understood the limitations of NGS for microbiome studies, and there have been calls for developing novel techniques to help overcome these limitations [6–11]. We argue that biosensing is a vital avenue to consider in this endeavor. While biosensing has had many definitions over the years, a biosensor can be defined as a device or method that uses a biologically derived recognition element, or bioreceptor, to help detect or quantify a target molecule or condition [12]. Biosensors are inherently interdisciplinary devices incorporating chemistry, physics, engineering, biology, and sometimes nanotechnology. This field, like NGS, can be very useful for investigating the microbial world; however, few examples of biosensors applied to the soil microbiome have been published at the time of this manuscript’s submission. Previously, biosensors have primarily been applied to the biomedical and ecotoxicology fields. However, biosensing has much to offer soil microbiology. Though many reviews are already available for detailed examinations of different biosensor examples, here we will discuss broad categories of biosensor types with potential uses in soil microbiology. Table 2 summarizes standard biosensors and novel technologies most suited for soil microbiome characterization. The following section will examine more direct applications to the soil microbiome. Table 2 Biosensing applied to the soil microbiome

Bioreceptor & signal type	Example & reference	Time of assay, hours	Approximate size	Strengths	Weaknesses	
Enzyme Electrical	Glucose monitors [14]	 < 1	Handheld	Very substrate specific

Rapid

Easy to use

Mature technology

	Limited stability

Production is costly

	
Antibody Optical	LFIA, ELISA [117, 118]	 < 2	Handheld	Very specific

Can be rapid

Mature technology

Easy visual identification

	Moderate stability

Requires immune response to produce bioreceptor

	
Antibody Optical	Optical array [9]	 < 1	Handheld	Very specific

Multiplex array

	Moderate stability

Requires immune response to produce bioreceptors

Complicated analysis of multiplexed visual data

	
Aptamer Optical	[131]	 < 1	Handheld	Can be highly specific

High stability

	Need to generate aptamer libraries to increase specificity	
Aptamer Electrical	Electrochemical arraya	Not reporteda	Handheld	Can be highly specific

Multiplex array

	Need to generate aptamer libraries to increase specificity

Novel technologya

	
Genetic circuit

Optical

	[120, 123, 132]	 < 2	Handheld	Can be highly specific

Can incorporate logic into response

Commercially available bioreceptors

	Takes significant laboratory skill and time

Could affect community under study

	
Biosensing

in general

		 < 2	Handheld	Rapid

Low-cost

Handheld and portable

Already used for point-of-care tests

	Newer technologies

Often have trade-off between stability and specificity

	
aSeveral papers have noted that aptamer-based electrochemical biosensors have great potential [6, 44, 68], but no papers were found that have already used this technology

Biosensing, like sequencing, is not a new technology. Though the classification of biosensors can be a bit nebulous, they can be categorized by the biological recognition element, or bioreceptor, and the signal they produce. The bioreceptor chosen significantly impacts the biosensor function. Enzymes are often used to detect metabolites (e.g., glucose monitor), and antibodies were used to detect target cells or viruses (e.g., rapid COVID-19 test). These two classes of molecules can be very sensitive and selective in their binding. However, purifying enzymes and generating antibodies are costly and time-intensive processes. Moreover, enzymes and antibodies are unstable and must be kept in controlled conditions. Otherwise, they denature and become inactive. A newer group of bioreceptor molecules are aptamers (Fig. 2). These nucleic acid polymers can specifically bind to targets, just like antibodies. These molecules are more stable than antibodies and more inexpensive to produce. Moreover, they do not require animals or an immune response in their production. However, it is difficult for a single aptamer to bind a unique microbial species consistently, so recent work has generated aptamer libraries that collectively bind a species with high specificity and sensitivity [6, 29, 44, 68]. There are other types of bioreceptors that are much bigger and more complex. Some studies use entire organisms, and these organisms are often “model” organisms, like E. coli cells or even mice [24, 112–114], that have been well characterized over many years of research. Some studies will genetically modify these reporter organisms to produce specific responses to the target molecules or conditions [114].

While the choice of bioreceptor is a critical design parameter, biosensing is also classified based on the type of signal they produce, which can be broadly divided into electrochemical or optical (Fig. 2). Electrochemical biosensors have been used extensively in the past couple of decades, and these sensors report biological activity via an electric signal. The classic biosensor that has been the field’s flagship is the glucose monitor [14]. This electrochemical device measures the electron flow caused by enzymes interacting with glucose to determine how much glucose is present quantitatively. It is called an amperometric biosensor because it detects current. Another example is the potentiometric biosensor that measures voltage instead of current; it measures the difference in potential, or voltage, between two or more electrodes. One benefit of potentiometric sensing is that they generally do not consume the analytes; instead, these can be reused for multiple rounds of sensing. These are often used for the new class of wearable biosensors that can continuously monitor subsurface conditions [115, 116]. Voltammetric sensors report both current and voltage changes. Finally, electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) reports the impedance signal from an electrode, which is a complex number version of electrical resistance resulting from alternating current (AC). All of these have been applied to detect target analytes, and their success largely depends on the construction of the electrodes themselves. Generating the correct chemistry and understanding the electronics of the primary and secondary interactions is crucial to these biosensors.

The other large class of signals that biosensors produce is optical. Optical methods are varied, but one classic example is the lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) [117]. For LFIA, a liquid sample is placed on a paper-based test strip, and the sample flows through the strip along with pre-deposited particles (gold nanoparticles or fluorescent polymeric particles) conjugated with bioreceptors (usually antibodies). The target molecule is sandwiched between the surface-bound bioreceptors and the bioreceptor particles at the test line, like in the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The presence of bioreceptor particles (and subsequently the target presence) can be confirmed visually via pink coloration (from gold nanoparticles) or fluorescence (from fluorescent polymeric particles). A commercial example of this is the urine-based pregnancy test. Though often designed to report a binary result, if the test and control bands are examined for fluorescent intensity, this method can also be used to generate quantitative data.

ELISA is a predecessor to LFIA, typically conducted in a lab setting, with better sensitivity and specificity. ELISA uses the sandwich method, with an antibody as a bioreceptor and an enzyme–substrate pair as a signaling molecule [118]. The latter can sometimes be replaced with a fluorescent dye conjugated with antibody-to-antibody. It is typically conducted on a microwell plate. While binding and washing are performed automatically via the capillary action through paper pores in LFIA, ELISA utilizes pipetting for adding and rinsing reagents. Automated pipettor systems are often used to automate and multiplex ELISA. Detection is conducted optically, typically utilizing a microplate reader.

Other optical biosensors include using whole, live cells that often contain engineered genetic circuits. These genetic circuits couple the genes of natural detection molecules with transgenic modules to produce a fluorescently active molecule like green fluorescence protein (GFP), luciferase, or violacein. Several studies detected quorum-sensing molecules or cell stress responses using these types of bioreceptors [23–25, 119–121]. These genetic circuits can even contain genetic logic such that the response is only generated when multiple conditions are met or a response is linearly dependent on a target concentration [122]. Genetic circuits have been made to detect and respond to various signals, and recent studies have shown the ability to produce other classes of molecules at target detection [123, 124].

In recent years, nanomaterials have become an important part of biosensing research. Because of their high surface-to-volume ratios, they can accommodate more bioreceptors on a sensor surface or generate stronger electrochemical (or unique optical) signals [125]. Various nanomaterials also allow for customization and functionalization of their structure and surfaces [126]. They can also enter organisms and interact with their internal systems [126]. Quantum dots and carbon dots fluoresce and have been used for detecting targets [10, 127], and nanodiamonds have been used to prevent biofouling of submerged oxygen sensors [128].

Biosensing design considerations for the soil microbiome

Meta-omics technologies are excellent tools for microbiology, but they have limitations that biosensing can help address. Biosensors can be applied to soil microbiome characterization to add another tool to the microbiologist’s toolbelt. Microbiome biosensing should strive for these characteristics: multiplexing [6, 18, 129, 130], stability of the biosensor itself in the field or non-ideal laboratory conditions, and ease of use and manufacture. These ideas will be discussed below, followed by more specific potential directions.

To understand the community of a microbiome, knowing and understanding one aspect by itself is not very useful in understanding community dynamics; thus, multiplexed analyses are critical. In other words, multiple targets or conditions must be analyzed collectively for a given sample. Multiplexing is known to be essential and has been implemented in many studies and products over the years (Fig. 2). There are commercially available functional assays that are multiplexed. For example, multi-well microplates determine what kinds of substrates organisms in a sample can digest and process [55]. Often, the signal is a visual intensity originating from each well on these plates. Imaging the entire plate and analyzing the color intensities from each well has been the general practice, typically using a microplate reader. For simplicity or field use, this microplate reader can easily be replaced with a smartphone camera [118]. Functional assays require a culturing step for the organisms to degrade the provided substrates successfully, and as stated previously, culturing can introduce bias. Multiplex terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism is another common method that uses multiplexing to detect a “signature,” “barcode,” or “fingerprint” of the community, and again the raw data for this method is a visual image [46, 55, 133] (Fig. 2). This method involves many steps that must be completed in a lab setting. One study looked at generating an assay of antibodies to provide a signature of a disease state [9]; this study used a machine learning algorithm to process their image data and determine data trends. Multiplexing has already been successfully applied to microbiome analysis, but these methods are thus far limited to laboratory analyses. They have not been developed for field use, and most have not been designed for rapid analysis. Because the soil microbiome can change quickly over time, detecting characteristics in situ is essential. Biosensors attempting to characterize the soil microbiome should take these existing multiplexing technologies and apply them to field detection platforms that can quickly collect data.

Several factors need to be considered to develop a field-ready biosensor. Firstly, the effects of the soil matrix must be considered. As mentioned previously, common practice is to remove the matrix effects via a liquid extraction method. This step alone could require extensive research and experimentation to determine the optimal way to extract meaningful analytes from the soil while minimizing bias and process effects. However, because liquid extraction is currently standard, that is where any research into that method ought to start. After matrix effects have been overcome, the bioreceptor must tolerate fluctuating temperatures, pH, and humidity/moisture levels. This likely excludes enzymes and antibodies from these sensors, but aptamers, modified electrodes, and genetic circuits in robust microbes could still be useful (Table 2). The bioreceptor should also be specific and sensitive enough to detect the target in complex samples at environmentally relevant concentrations. This requires rigorous testing and careful selection of bioreceptors and overall biosensing methods for the desired target in its natural or minimally modified state. In addition, the signal must be comparably detectable in various field conditions; otherwise, the biosensor can only be used in limited areas or situations. For optical signals, the environmental lighting should not significantly affect the data. Either electrochemical data should be collected instead, or the optical signals should be corrected for ambient lighting variations. Another possibility is to have a small, lighting-controlled space around the sensor to take that image or other optical data. Electrochemical sensing can also have challenges in field conditions. Biofouling is a common problem, as is electrode degradation. Nanodiamonds and carbon nanotubes have been shown to limit biofouling [128, 134]. In addition, the electrodes can be coated with various layers to improve performance [135], and electrode degradation can be minimized with material selection and manufacturing processes [136].

Potential biosensing applications to soil microbiome characterization

Multiplexing, field deployment, ease of use, and ease of manufacture are simple to discuss but can be tricky to implement. Still, researchers should consider those ideas when developing novel biosensing methods for characterizing soil microbiomes. Specific examples of biosensing applied to the soil microbiome are scarce, but several papers noted potential directions or future projects combining these fields. Examples are discussed below.

There are recognized challenges with optical methods, and electrochemical sensors have some advantages. Amperometric detection can be broadly applied; this method allows for low detection limits with reasonably simple devices, and current is easy to analyze relative to optical images. One issue with this approach is biofouling when the electrodes become impeded by organic matter build-up, though this can be overcome with nanomaterials, chemical layers, and material selection [128, 134–136]. Several studies have commented on the possibility of an aptamer-based electrochemical sensor [44, 68]. Perhaps an amperometric assay could be developed to sense a variety of metabolites all at once on a multi-well plate. These studies could follow the method [9] in which certain bioreceptors were bound to different areas of a larger plate. Thus, after applying the sample, each distinct plate region emits different signals to generate a sample signature. Detecting metabolites in this way would reduce the need for mass spectrometry, which is a technically challenging method to implement.

There are other ways to multiplex, like having different carbon dots with different colors for different targets [127]. Alternatively, studies have been conducted with microscopic beads coated with bioreceptors, and these have been used for multiplexed analysis when the beads have a variety of detection targets [91]. The LFIA method could be expanded to use various aptamers; perhaps there would be a way to create a multiplexed LFIA, e.g., multi-channel paper microfluidic chips [137]. If several channels radiated out from a central sample pad, it could be possible to seed different bioreceptor-coated beads at the beginning of each channel [138]. LFIA and paper microfluidic chips could be particularly insightful when the color intensity of the test band is quantified with an optical reader. Even if the data is purely qualitative, LFIA and paper microfluidic chips can provide results in minutes to enable field assessment of those targets.

A smartphone camera can be used to analyze optical signals rapidly and in the field from the LFIA and paper microfluidic chips; this is a viable method in previous works, particularly when used with a portable microscope (including a smartphone-based fluorescence microscope) [138–142]. The smartphone could be a vital component of a field-deployable biosensor because it is a mini-computer. It can take in high-quality visual data and run data analysis through a custom app. Or, if there is an internet connection, data could be remotely uploaded and processed on the cloud before researchers even get back to the lab. Figure 3 shows an example of analyzing bacterial species from environmental water samples, utilizing a set of peptides extracted from bacterial biofilms, a multi-channel paper microfluidic chip, a smartphone camera as an optical reader and data processing unit, and machine learning to analyze the data [115].Fig. 3 An example of analyzing bacterial species from environmental water samples. It utilizes a set of peptides extracted from bacterial biofilms, a multi-channel paper microfluidic chip, a smartphone camera as an optical reader and data processing unit, and machine learning to analyze the data. Reprinted with permission from [141].

Copyright 2021, Elsevier

Regardless of the data being collected, machine learning will likely be needed to analyze these larger, multiplexed datasets. Several papers have successfully implemented machine learning, and many compare two or more algorithms to see which is better for their dataset [141, 143–146]. Machine learning has also been used with NGS datasets [83], and many algorithms have been used with both NGS and biosensor data. A comparison of algorithms used is shown in Fig. 4.Fig. 4 Venn diagram showing a sample of machine learning algorithms applied to NGS and biosensor data. Most NGS algorithms found in the literature were supervised learning methods except for PCA. There were also several papers that detailed novel algorithms for NGS data. A great variety of algorithms are used with biosensor data, and many of them are also used with NGS data; there is significant overlap. ANN = artificial neural networks; kNN = k-nearest neighbors; SVM = support vector machine; XGBoost = extreme gradient boosting; LR = logistic regression; PCA = principal component analysis; LDA = linear discriminant analysis

The standard practices of removing the matrix and then destroying the sample during analysis are inadequate for studying the soil microbiome in its natural matrix. The field of wearable biosensors could address the issue of destructive sampling. These devices are meant to continuously measure metabolites on or in the human body via electrochemical sensing [115, 116], and this technology could be applied to continuous monitoring of targets in the soil. One paper analyzed gases released from soil to investigate the soil microbiome [40], and there seems to be great promise in gas analysis for microbiome characterization [147] (Fig. 5). Gas molecules and their concentrations can reveal respiration rates and other metabolic processes [147] while maintaining the soil matrix’s natural state. This minimizes processing effects while simplifying the biosensor and its method of use. Perhaps the genetic circuit technologies of fluorescent, whole-cell biosensors, which would have little direct application in opaque soil, could be reconfigured to emit alternate signals like gaseous metabolites that could pass through the soil matrix more easily than optical signals.Fig. 5 An example of a gas sensor for assessing the microbiome. While this work was designed to assess the intestinal flora, e.g., gut microbiome, it can be adapted to the soil microbiome. Reprinted from [147] under Creative Commons Attribution License

Our group recently applied biosensors to the soil microbiome. This study used induced natural fluorescence, a smartphone to capture optical intensity, and machine learning to categorize bacteria derived from the soil matrix. See Fig. 6 for a depiction of the process used. This process could be a model for future works applying biosensors to soil microbiome characterization.Fig. 6 An example of optical biosensor to soil microbiome characterization. A smartphone is modified with an acrylic film wheel (12 filters) and three LEDs to capture multiple autofluorescence images of various bacterial mixtures and soil samples. Learning databases are collected from various bacterial mixtures, and the field soil samples are used as a test set to predict the dominant bacterial species

Conclusion

In conclusion, the field of biosensing has a lot to offer soil microbiome characterization. NGS and meta-omics methods are central to microbiology, and they can generate data for in-depth analyses of communities and community structures via DNA and RNA analyses. However, these technologies typically require extensive time, money, expertise, and computing power to be effective. Moreover, these techniques are restricted mainly to controlled laboratory conditions; they are not applicable in field settings, nor can they rapidly generate data. Biosensing technology can be applied to soil microbiome characterization to overcome these limitations and to complement NGS and meta-omics techniques more broadly. Biosensing as a field has not been applied to the soil microbiome until recently, and some methods are better suited for this new application. Aptamers are more stable than enzymes or antibodies and are more appropriate for field-use biosensors. Given that any microbiome is a highly complex system, a multiplex sensor will be needed, and with large, complicated datasets, machine learning might benefit the analysis. If the signals from the biosensors are optical, a smartphone can be used as a portable optical reader and potential data-analyzing device; however, optical signals can be affected by environmental lighting conditions. In contrast, electrical signals might suffer less distortion in the field. Biosensing is a rich field that couples engineering and biology, and applying its toolset to help advance soil microbiome characterization would be a boon to microbiology more broadly.

Authors’ contributions

Lexi DeFord: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization. Jeong-Yeol Yoon: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

Funding

This work was supported by the University of Arizona’s One Health Initiative Pilot Grant and the multi-state research grant (NC-1194): Nanotechnology and Biosensors from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Whitman WB Coleman DC Wiebe WJ Prokaryotes: The unseen majority Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998 95 6578 6583 10.1073/pnas.95.12.6578 9618454
Whitman WB, Coleman DC, Wiebe WJ. Prokaryotes: The unseen majority. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95:6578–83. 10.1073/pnas.95.12.6578.9618454 10.1073/pnas.95.12.6578
2. Mishra A Singh L Singh D Unboxing the black box—one step forward to understand the soil microbiome: A systematic review Microb Ecol 2023 85 669 683 10.1007/s00248-022-01962-5 35112151
Mishra A, Singh L, Singh D. Unboxing the black box—one step forward to understand the soil microbiome: A systematic review. Microb Ecol. 2023;85:669–83. 10.1007/s00248-022-01962-5.35112151 10.1007/s00248-022-01962-5
3. Coyne MS A cartoon history of soil microbiology J Nat Res Life Sci Educ 1996 25 30 36 10.2134/jnrlse.1996.0030
Coyne MS. A cartoon history of soil microbiology. J Nat Res Life Sci Educ. 1996;25:30–6. 10.2134/jnrlse.1996.0030.10.2134/jnrlse.1996.0030
4. Cha JY Han S Hong HJ Microbial and biochemical basis of a Fusarium wilt-suppressive soil ISME J 2016 10 119 129 10.1038/ismej.2015.95 26057845
Cha JY, Han S, Hong HJ, et al. Microbial and biochemical basis of a Fusarium wilt-suppressive soil. ISME J. 2016;10:119–29. 10.1038/ismej.2015.95.26057845 10.1038/ismej.2015.95
5. Durán P, Jorquera M, Viscardi S, Carrion VJ, Mora M de la L, Pozo MJ. Screening and characterization of potentially suppressive soils against Gaeumannomyces graminis under extensive wheat cropping by Chilean indigenous communities. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:1552. 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01552.
6. Zhang Y Xing H Bolotnikov G Krämer M Gotzmann N Knippschild U Kissmann AK Rosenau F Enriched aptamer libraries in fluorescence-based assays for Rikenella microfusus-specific gut microbiome analyses Microorganisms 2023 11 2266 10.3390/microorganisms11092266 37764110
Zhang Y, Xing H, Bolotnikov G, Krämer M, Gotzmann N, Knippschild U, Kissmann AK, Rosenau F. Enriched aptamer libraries in fluorescence-based assays for Rikenella microfusus-specific gut microbiome analyses. Microorganisms. 2023;11:2266. 10.3390/microorganisms11092266.37764110 10.3390/microorganisms11092266
7. Nesme J Achouak W Agathos SN Back to the future of soil metagenomics Front Microbiol 2016 7 73 10.3389/fmicb.2016.0007 26903960
Nesme J, Achouak W, Agathos SN, et al. Back to the future of soil metagenomics. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:73. 10.3389/fmicb.2016.0007.26903960 10.3389/fmicb.2016.0007
8. Jansson JK Hofmockel KS The soil microbiome — from metagenomics to metaphenomics Curr Opin Microbiol 2018 43 162 168 10.1016/j.mib.2018.01.013 29454931
Jansson JK, Hofmockel KS. The soil microbiome — from metagenomics to metaphenomics. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2018;43:162–8. 10.1016/j.mib.2018.01.013.29454931 10.1016/j.mib.2018.01.013
9. Maltz-Matyschsyk M Melchiorre CK Herbst KW Development of a biomarker signature using grating-coupled fluorescence plasmonic microarray for diagnosis of MIS-C Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2023 11 1066391 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1066391 37064248
Maltz-Matyschsyk M, Melchiorre CK, Herbst KW, et al. Development of a biomarker signature using grating-coupled fluorescence plasmonic microarray for diagnosis of MIS-C. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023;11:1066391. 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1066391.37064248 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1066391
10. Radwan O Chapleau ME Chapleau RR Ruiz ON Discovery, development and implementation of biomarker-specific peptide BRE for biosensing hydrocarbon-degrading fungi Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 2023 178 105568 10.1016/j.ibiod.2023.105568
Radwan O, Chapleau ME, Chapleau RR, Ruiz ON. Discovery, development and implementation of biomarker-specific peptide BRE for biosensing hydrocarbon-degrading fungi. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation. 2023;178: 105568. 10.1016/j.ibiod.2023.105568.10.1016/j.ibiod.2023.105568
11. Genee HJ Bali AP Petersen SD Siedler S Bonde MT Gronenberg LS Kristensen M Harrison SJ Sommer MOA Functional mining of transporters using synthetic selections Nat Chem Biol 2016 12 1015 1022 10.1038/nchembio.2189 27694800
Genee HJ, Bali AP, Petersen SD, Siedler S, Bonde MT, Gronenberg LS, Kristensen M, Harrison SJ, Sommer MOA. Functional mining of transporters using synthetic selections. Nat Chem Biol. 2016;12:1015–22. 10.1038/nchembio.2189.27694800 10.1038/nchembio.2189
12. IUPAC. Biosensor: The IUPAC Compendium of Chemical Terminology. 2014. 10.1351/goldbook.B00663.
13. Chen LC Wang E Tai CS Chiu YC Li CW Lin YR Lee TH Huang CW Chen JC Chen WL Improving the reproducibility, accuracy, and stability of an electrochemical biosensor platform for point-of-care use Biosens Bioelectron 2020 155 112111 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112111 32217334
Chen LC, Wang E, Tai CS, Chiu YC, Li CW, Lin YR, Lee TH, Huang CW, Chen JC, Chen WL. Improving the reproducibility, accuracy, and stability of an electrochemical biosensor platform for point-of-care use. Biosens Bioelectron. 2020;155: 112111. 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112111.32217334 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112111
14. Lee I Probst D Klonoff D Sode K Continuous glucose monitoring systems - Current status and future perspectives of the flagship technologies in biosensor research - Biosens Bioelectron 2021 181 113054 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113054 33775474
Lee I, Probst D, Klonoff D, Sode K. Continuous glucose monitoring systems - Current status and future perspectives of the flagship technologies in biosensor research -. Biosens Bioelectron. 2021;181: 113054. 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113054.33775474 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113054
15. Patnode ML Beller ZW Han ND Interspecies competition impacts targeted manipulation of human gut bacteria by fiber-derived glycans Cell 2019 179 59 73 10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.011 31539500
Patnode ML, Beller ZW, Han ND, et al. Interspecies competition impacts targeted manipulation of human gut bacteria by fiber-derived glycans. Cell. 2019;179:59–73. 10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.011.31539500 10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.011
16. Woo SG Moon SJ Kim SK A designed whole-cell biosensor for live diagnosis of gut inflammation through nitrate sensing Biosens Bioelectron 2020 168 112523 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112523 32871497
Woo SG, Moon SJ, Kim SK, et al. A designed whole-cell biosensor for live diagnosis of gut inflammation through nitrate sensing. Biosens Bioelectron. 2020;168: 112523. 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112523.32871497 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112523
17. Yang G Xiao Z Tang C Deng Y Huang H He Z Recent advances in biosensor for detection of lung cancer biomarkers Biosens Bioelectron 2019 141 111416 10.1016/j.bios.2019.111416 31279179
Yang G, Xiao Z, Tang C, Deng Y, Huang H, He Z. Recent advances in biosensor for detection of lung cancer biomarkers. Biosens Bioelectron. 2019;141: 111416. 10.1016/j.bios.2019.111416.31279179 10.1016/j.bios.2019.111416
18. Zhang S Rong F Guo C Duan F He L Wang M Zhang Z Kang M Du M Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) based electrochemical biosensors for early cancer diagnosis in vitro Coord Chem Rev 2021 439 213948 10.1016/j.ccr.2021.213948
Zhang S, Rong F, Guo C, Duan F, He L, Wang M, Zhang Z, Kang M, Du M. Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) based electrochemical biosensors for early cancer diagnosis in vitro. Coord Chem Rev. 2021;439: 213948. 10.1016/j.ccr.2021.213948.10.1016/j.ccr.2021.213948
19. Sochor J Zitka O Hynek D Bio-sensing of cadmium(II) ions using Staphylococcus aureus Sensors 2011 11 10638 10663 10.3390/s111110638 22346664
Sochor J, Zitka O, Hynek D, et al. Bio-sensing of cadmium(II) ions using Staphylococcus aureus. Sensors. 2011;11:10638–63. 10.3390/s111110638.22346664 10.3390/s111110638
20. Terekhova VA Biotesting of soil ecotoxicity in case of chemical contamination: Modern Approaches to integration for environmental assessment (a review) Eurasian Soil Sci 2022 55 601 612 10.1134/S106422932205009X
Terekhova VA. Biotesting of soil ecotoxicity in case of chemical contamination: Modern Approaches to integration for environmental assessment (a review). Eurasian Soil Sci. 2022;55:601–12. 10.1134/S106422932205009X.10.1134/S106422932205009X
21. Zhang H Li A Wei Y Miao Q Xu W Zhao B Guo Y Sheng Y Yang Y Development of a new methodology for multifaceted assessment, analysis, and characterization of soil contamination J Hazard Mater 2022 438 129542 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.129542 35810516
Zhang H, Li A, Wei Y, Miao Q, Xu W, Zhao B, Guo Y, Sheng Y, Yang Y. Development of a new methodology for multifaceted assessment, analysis, and characterization of soil contamination. J Hazard Mater. 2022;438: 129542. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.129542.35810516 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.129542
22. Baranova MN Babikova PA Kudzhaev AM Mokrushina YA Belozerova OA Yunin MA Kovalchuk S Gabibov AG Smirnov IV Terekhov SS Live biosensors for ultrahigh-throughput screening of antimicrobial activity against gram-negative bacteria Antibiotics 2021 10 1161 10.3390/antibiotics10101161 34680742
Baranova MN, Babikova PA, Kudzhaev AM, Mokrushina YA, Belozerova OA, Yunin MA, Kovalchuk S, Gabibov AG, Smirnov IV, Terekhov SS. Live biosensors for ultrahigh-throughput screening of antimicrobial activity against gram-negative bacteria. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1161. 10.3390/antibiotics10101161.34680742 10.3390/antibiotics10101161
23. Begum JF Tamilarasi M Pushpakanth P Balachandar D A simple method for direct isolation of N-acyl-L-homoserine lactone mediated biofilm-forming rhizobacteria from roots J Microbiol Meth 2019 156 34 39 10.1016/j.mimet.2018.11.018
Begum JF, Tamilarasi M, Pushpakanth P, Balachandar D. A simple method for direct isolation of N-acyl-L-homoserine lactone mediated biofilm-forming rhizobacteria from roots. J Microbiol Meth. 2019;156:34–9. 10.1016/j.mimet.2018.11.018.10.1016/j.mimet.2018.11.018
24. Lv D Ma A Tang X Bai Z Qi H Zhuang G Profile of the culturable microbiome capable of producing acyl-homoserine lactone in the tobacco phyllosphere J Environ Sci 2013 25 357 366 10.1016/S1001-0742(12)60027-8
Lv D, Ma A, Tang X, Bai Z, Qi H, Zhuang G. Profile of the culturable microbiome capable of producing acyl-homoserine lactone in the tobacco phyllosphere. J Environ Sci. 2013;25:357–66. 10.1016/S1001-0742(12)60027-8.10.1016/S1001-0742(12)60027-8
25. Reen FJ Gutiérrez-Barranquero JA McCarthy RR Woods DF Scarciglia S Adams C Fog Nielsen K Gram L O’Gara F Quorum sensing signaling alters virulence potential and population dynamics in complex microbiome-host interactomes Front Microbiol 2019 10 2131 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02131 31572336
Reen FJ, Gutiérrez-Barranquero JA, McCarthy RR, Woods DF, Scarciglia S, Adams C, Fog Nielsen K, Gram L, O’Gara F. Quorum sensing signaling alters virulence potential and population dynamics in complex microbiome-host interactomes. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:2131. 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02131.31572336 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02131
26. Thilakarathna MS Raizada MN A biosensor-based assay (GlnluX-Agar) shows defoliation triggers rapid release of glutamine from nodules and young roots of forage legumes Phytobiomes J 2019 3 85 91 10.1094/PBIOMES-03-19-0014-R
Thilakarathna MS, Raizada MN. A biosensor-based assay (GlnluX-Agar) shows defoliation triggers rapid release of glutamine from nodules and young roots of forage legumes. Phytobiomes J. 2019;3:85–91. 10.1094/PBIOMES-03-19-0014-R.10.1094/PBIOMES-03-19-0014-R
27. Vaaben TH Vazquez-Uribe R Sommer MOA Characterization of eight bacterial biosensors for microbial diagnostic and therapeutic applications ACS Synth Biol 2022 11 4184 4192 10.1021/acssynbio.2c00491 36449712
Vaaben TH, Vazquez-Uribe R, Sommer MOA. Characterization of eight bacterial biosensors for microbial diagnostic and therapeutic applications. ACS Synth Biol. 2022;11:4184–92. 10.1021/acssynbio.2c00491.36449712 10.1021/acssynbio.2c00491
28. Wang J Zhang C Childers WS A biosensor for detection of indole metabolites ACS Synth Biol 2021 10 1605 1614 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00090 34170110
Wang J, Zhang C, Childers WS. A biosensor for detection of indole metabolites. ACS Synth Biol. 2021;10:1605–14. 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00090.34170110 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00090
29. Raber HF Kubiczek DH Bodenberger N Flucell-selex aptamers as specific binding molecules for diagnostics of the health relevant gut bacterium akkermansia muciniphila Int J Mol Sci 2021 22 10425 10.3390/ijms221910425 34638764
Raber HF, Kubiczek DH, Bodenberger N, et al. Flucell-selex aptamers as specific binding molecules for diagnostics of the health relevant gut bacterium akkermansia muciniphila. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:10425. 10.3390/ijms221910425.34638764 10.3390/ijms221910425
30. Sun H Xu M Wu S Dong R Angelidaki I Zhang Y Innovative air-cathode bioelectrochemical sensor for monitoring of total volatile fatty acids during anaerobic digestion Chemosphere 2021 273 129660 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.129660 33497985
Sun H, Xu M, Wu S, Dong R, Angelidaki I, Zhang Y. Innovative air-cathode bioelectrochemical sensor for monitoring of total volatile fatty acids during anaerobic digestion. Chemosphere. 2021;273: 129660. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.129660.33497985 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.129660
31. Naumova NB Belanov IP Alikina TY Kabilov MR Undisturbed soil pedon under birch forest: Characterization of microbiome in genetic horizons Soil Syst 2021 5 14 10.3390/soilsystems5010014
Naumova NB, Belanov IP, Alikina TY, Kabilov MR. Undisturbed soil pedon under birch forest: Characterization of microbiome in genetic horizons. Soil Syst. 2021;5:14. 10.3390/soilsystems5010014.10.3390/soilsystems5010014
32. Maldonado JE Gaete A Mandakovic D Aguado-Norese C Aguilar M Gutiérrez RA González M Partners to survive: Hoffmannseggia doellii root-associated microbiome at the Atacama Desert New Phytol 2022 234 2126 2139 10.1111/nph.18080 35274744
Maldonado JE, Gaete A, Mandakovic D, Aguado-Norese C, Aguilar M, Gutiérrez RA, González M. Partners to survive: Hoffmannseggia doellii root-associated microbiome at the Atacama Desert. New Phytol. 2022;234:2126–39. 10.1111/nph.18080.35274744 10.1111/nph.18080
33. Azevedo-Silva D Rasmussen JA Carneiro M Gilbert MTP Azevedo H Feasibility of applying shotgun metagenomic analyses to grapevine leaf, rhizosphere and soil microbiome characterisation Aust J Grape Wine Res 2021 27 519 526 10.1111/ajgw.12508
Azevedo-Silva D, Rasmussen JA, Carneiro M, Gilbert MTP, Azevedo H. Feasibility of applying shotgun metagenomic analyses to grapevine leaf, rhizosphere and soil microbiome characterisation. Aust J Grape Wine Res. 2021;27:519–26. 10.1111/ajgw.12508.10.1111/ajgw.12508
34. Doherty JR Crouch JA Roberts JA Elucidating the influence of resident seed and soil microbiota on the developing creeping bentgrass microbiome Agrosyst Geosci Environ 2020 3 e20038 10.1002/agg2.20038
Doherty JR, Crouch JA, Roberts JA. Elucidating the influence of resident seed and soil microbiota on the developing creeping bentgrass microbiome. Agrosyst Geosci Environ. 2020;3: e20038. 10.1002/agg2.20038.10.1002/agg2.20038
35. Cordero OX Datta MS Microbial interactions and community assembly at microscales Curr Opin Microbiol 2016 31 227 234 10.1016/j.mib.2016.03.015 27232202
Cordero OX, Datta MS. Microbial interactions and community assembly at microscales. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2016;31:227–34. 10.1016/j.mib.2016.03.015.27232202 10.1016/j.mib.2016.03.015
36. Nevins CJ Nakatsu C Armstrong S Characterization of microbial community response to cover crop residue decomposition Soil Biol Biochem 2018 127 39 49 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.09.015
Nevins CJ, Nakatsu C, Armstrong S. Characterization of microbial community response to cover crop residue decomposition. Soil Biol Biochem. 2018;127:39–49. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.09.015.10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.09.015
37. Xue P Liu X Zhao L Zhang J He Z Integrating high-throughput sequencing and metabolomics to investigate the stereoselective responses of soil microorganisms to chiral fungicide cis-epoxiconazole Chemosphere 2022 300 134198 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134198 35248591
Xue P, Liu X, Zhao L, Zhang J, He Z. Integrating high-throughput sequencing and metabolomics to investigate the stereoselective responses of soil microorganisms to chiral fungicide cis-epoxiconazole. Chemosphere. 2022;300: 134198. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134198.35248591 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134198
38. Agam N Berliner PR Diurnal Water Content Changes in the Bare Soil of a Coastal Desert J Hydrometeorol 2004 5 922 933 10.1175/1525-7541(2004)005/3C0922:DWCCIT/3E2.0.CO;2
Agam N, Berliner PR. Diurnal water content changes in the bare soil of a coastal desert. J Hydrometeorol. 2004;5:922–33. 10.1175/1525-7541(2004)005/3C0922:DWCCIT/3E2.0.CO;2.10.1175/1525-7541(2004)005/3C0922:DWCCIT/3E2.0.CO;2
39. Pershina EV Ivanova EA Korvigo IO Chirak EL Sergaliev NH Abakumov EV Provorov NA Andronov EE Investigation of the core microbiome in main soil types from the East European plain Sci Total Environ 2018 631–632 1421 1430 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.136
Pershina EV, Ivanova EA, Korvigo IO, Chirak EL, Sergaliev NH, Abakumov EV, Provorov NA, Andronov EE. Investigation of the core microbiome in main soil types from the East European plain. Sci Total Environ. 2018;631–632:1421–30. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.136.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.136
40. Kim J Goldstein AH Chakraborty R Jardine K Weber R Sorensen PO Wang S Faybishenko B Misztal PK Brodie EL Measurement of volatile compounds for real-time analysis of soil microbial metabolic response to simulated snowmelt Front Microbiol 2021 12 679671 10.3389/fmicb.2021.679671 34248891
Kim J, Goldstein AH, Chakraborty R, Jardine K, Weber R, Sorensen PO, Wang S, Faybishenko B, Misztal PK, Brodie EL. Measurement of volatile compounds for real-time analysis of soil microbial metabolic response to simulated snowmelt. Front Microbiol. 2021;12: 679671. 10.3389/fmicb.2021.679671.34248891 10.3389/fmicb.2021.679671
41. Zolti A Green SJ Sela N Hadar Y Minz D The microbiome as a biosensor: Functional profiles elucidate hidden stress in hosts Microbiome 2020 8 71 10.1186/s40168-020-00850-9 32438915
Zolti A, Green SJ, Sela N, Hadar Y, Minz D. The microbiome as a biosensor: Functional profiles elucidate hidden stress in hosts. Microbiome. 2020;8:71. 10.1186/s40168-020-00850-9.32438915 10.1186/s40168-020-00850-9
42. Popov IV Mazanko MS Kulaeva ED Gut microbiota of bats: pro-mutagenic properties and possible frontiers in preventing emerging disease Sci Rep 2021 11 21075 10.1038/s41598-021-00604-z 34702917
Popov IV, Mazanko MS, Kulaeva ED, et al. Gut microbiota of bats: pro-mutagenic properties and possible frontiers in preventing emerging disease. Sci Rep. 2021;11:21075. 10.1038/s41598-021-00604-z.34702917 10.1038/s41598-021-00604-z
43. Zúñiga A Muñoz-Guamuro G Boivineau L Mayonove P Conejero I Pageaux GP Altwegg R Bonnet J A rapid and standardized workflow for functional assessment of bacterial biosensors in fecal samples Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022 10 859600 10.3389/fbioe.2022.859600 36072290
Zúñiga A, Muñoz-Guamuro G, Boivineau L, Mayonove P, Conejero I, Pageaux GP, Altwegg R, Bonnet J. A rapid and standardized workflow for functional assessment of bacterial biosensors in fecal samples. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022;10: 859600. 10.3389/fbioe.2022.859600.36072290 10.3389/fbioe.2022.859600
44. Xing H Zhang Y Krämer M A polyclonal aptamer library for the specific binding of the gut bacterium Roseburia intestinalis in mixtures with other gut microbiome bacteria and human stool samples Int J Mol Sci 2022 23 7744 10.3390/ijms23147744 35887092
Xing H, Zhang Y, Krämer M, et al. A polyclonal aptamer library for the specific binding of the gut bacterium Roseburia intestinalis in mixtures with other gut microbiome bacteria and human stool samples. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23:7744. 10.3390/ijms23147744.35887092 10.3390/ijms23147744
45. Moraskie M Roshid MHO O’Connor G Artola Zavala T Dikici E Zingg JM Deo S Daunert S Engineered biosensors for the quorum sensing molecule 3,5-dimethyl-pyrazine-2-ol (DPO) reveal its presence in humans, animals, and bacterial species beyond Vibrio cholerae Biosens Bioelectron 2023 237 115494 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115494 37419073
Moraskie M, Roshid MHO, O’Connor G, Artola Zavala T, Dikici E, Zingg JM, Deo S, Daunert S. Engineered biosensors for the quorum sensing molecule 3,5-dimethyl-pyrazine-2-ol (DPO) reveal its presence in humans, animals, and bacterial species beyond Vibrio cholerae. Biosens Bioelectron. 2023;237: 115494. 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115494.37419073 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115494
46. Gryta A Frąc M Methodological aspects of multiplex terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism-technique to describe the genetic diversity of soil bacteria, archaea and fungi Sensors 2020 20 3292 10.3390/s20113292 32527006
Gryta A, Frąc M. Methodological aspects of multiplex terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism-technique to describe the genetic diversity of soil bacteria, archaea and fungi. Sensors. 2020;20:3292. 10.3390/s20113292.32527006 10.3390/s20113292
47. Jurburg SD, Shek KL, McGuire K. Soil microbial composition varies in response to coffee agroecosystem management. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2020;96:fiaa164. 10.1093/femsec/fiaa164.
48. Zhang Y Yang S Zeng Y Chen Y Liu H Yan X Pu S A new quantitative insight: Interaction of polyethylene microplastics with soil - microbiome - crop J Hazard Mater 2023 460 132302 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.132302 37647663
Zhang Y, Yang S, Zeng Y, Chen Y, Liu H, Yan X, Pu S. A new quantitative insight: Interaction of polyethylene microplastics with soil - microbiome - crop. J Hazard Mater. 2023;460: 132302. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.132302.37647663 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.132302
49. Toledo S Bondaruk VF Yahdjian L Environmental factors regulate soil microbial attributes and their response to drought in rangeland ecosystems Sci Total Environ 2023 892 164406 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164406 37245802
Toledo S, Bondaruk VF, Yahdjian L, et al. Environmental factors regulate soil microbial attributes and their response to drought in rangeland ecosystems. Sci Total Environ. 2023;892: 164406. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164406.37245802 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164406
50. Finn DR Schroeder J Samad MS Poeplau C Tebbe CC Importance of sample pre-treatments for the DNA-based characterization of microbiomes in cropland and forest soils Soil Biol Biochem 2023 184 109077 10.1016/j.soilbio.2023.109077
Finn DR, Schroeder J, Samad MS, Poeplau C, Tebbe CC. Importance of sample pre-treatments for the DNA-based characterization of microbiomes in cropland and forest soils. Soil Biol Biochem. 2023;184: 109077. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2023.109077.10.1016/j.soilbio.2023.109077
51. Fricker AM Podlesny D Fricke WF What is new and relevant for sequencing-based microbiome research? A mini-review J Adv Res 2019 19 105 112 10.1016/j.jare.2019.03.006 31341676
Fricker AM, Podlesny D, Fricke WF. What is new and relevant for sequencing-based microbiome research? A mini-review J Adv Res. 2019;19:105–12. 10.1016/j.jare.2019.03.006.31341676 10.1016/j.jare.2019.03.006
52. Kui L Xiang G Wang Y Large-scale characterization of the soil microbiome in ancient tea plantations using high-throughput 16S rRNA and internal transcribed spacer amplicon sequencing Front Microbiol 2021 12 745225 10.3389/fmicb.2021.745225 34721345
Kui L, Xiang G, Wang Y, et al. Large-scale characterization of the soil microbiome in ancient tea plantations using high-throughput 16S rRNA and internal transcribed spacer amplicon sequencing. Front Microbiol. 2021;12: 745225. 10.3389/fmicb.2021.745225.34721345 10.3389/fmicb.2021.745225
53. Tuttle MS Mostow E Mukherjee P Hu FZ Melton-Kreft R Ehrlich GD Dowd SE Ghannoum MA Characterization of bacterial communities in venous insufficiency wounds by use of conventional culture and molecular diagnostic methods J Clin Microbiol 2011 49 3812 3819 10.1128/jcm.00847-11 21880958
Tuttle MS, Mostow E, Mukherjee P, Hu FZ, Melton-Kreft R, Ehrlich GD, Dowd SE, Ghannoum MA. Characterization of bacterial communities in venous insufficiency wounds by use of conventional culture and molecular diagnostic methods. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49:3812–9. 10.1128/jcm.00847-11.21880958 10.1128/jcm.00847-11
54. Puig S Ganigué R Batlle-Vilanova P Balaguer MD Bañeras L Colprim J Tracking bio-hydrogen-mediated production of commodity chemicals from carbon dioxide and renewable electricity Bioresour Technol 2017 228 201 209 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.12.035 28063363
Puig S, Ganigué R, Batlle-Vilanova P, Balaguer MD, Bañeras L, Colprim J. Tracking bio-hydrogen-mediated production of commodity chemicals from carbon dioxide and renewable electricity. Bioresour Technol. 2017;228:201–9. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.12.035.28063363 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.12.035
55. Mącik M Gryta A Sas-Paszt L Frąc M The status of soil microbiome as affected by the application of phosphorus biofertilizer: Fertilizer enriched with beneficial bacterial strains Int J Mol Sci 2020 21 8003 10.3390/ijms2121800 33121206
Mącik M, Gryta A, Sas-Paszt L, Frąc M. The status of soil microbiome as affected by the application of phosphorus biofertilizer: Fertilizer enriched with beneficial bacterial strains. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:8003. 10.3390/ijms2121800.33121206 10.3390/ijms2121800
56. Vieira AR Hiller NL Powell E Kim LHJ Spirk T Modesto A Kreft R Profiling microorganisms in whole saliva of children with and without dental caries Clin Exp Dent Res 2019 5 438 446 10.1002/cre2.206 31452955
Vieira AR, Hiller NL, Powell E, Kim LHJ, Spirk T, Modesto A, Kreft R. Profiling microorganisms in whole saliva of children with and without dental caries. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2019;5:438–46. 10.1002/cre2.206.31452955 10.1002/cre2.206
57. Meredith LK Ogée J Boye K Soil exchange rates of COS and CO18O differ with the diversity of microbial communities and their carbonic anhydrase enzymes ISME J 2019 13 290 300 10.1038/s41396-018-0270-2 30214028
Meredith LK, Ogée J, Boye K, et al. Soil exchange rates of COS and CO18O differ with the diversity of microbial communities and their carbonic anhydrase enzymes. ISME J. 2019;13:290–300. 10.1038/s41396-018-0270-2.30214028 10.1038/s41396-018-0270-2
58. Benucci GMN Bonito V Bonito G Fungal, bacterial, and archaeal diversity in soils beneath native and introduced plants in Fiji South Pacific Microb Ecol 2019 78 136 146 10.1007/s00248-018-1266-1 30288545
Benucci GMN, Bonito V, Bonito G. Fungal, bacterial, and archaeal diversity in soils beneath native and introduced plants in Fiji. South Pacific Microb Ecol. 2019;78:136–46. 10.1007/s00248-018-1266-1.30288545 10.1007/s00248-018-1266-1
59. Naylor D, Fansler S, Brislawn C, Nelson WC, Hofmockel KS, Jansson JK, Mcclure R. Deconstructing the soil microbiome into reduced-complexity functional modules. mBio. 2020;11:e01349–20. 10.1128/mBio.01349-20.
60. Pang Z Xu P Yu D Environmental adaptation of the root microbiome in two rice ecotypes Microbiol Res 2020 241 126588 10.1016/j.micres.2020.126588 32892063
Pang Z, Xu P, Yu D. Environmental adaptation of the root microbiome in two rice ecotypes. Microbiol Res. 2020;241: 126588. 10.1016/j.micres.2020.126588.32892063 10.1016/j.micres.2020.126588
61. Bao Y Qi B Huang W Liu B Li Y The fungal community in non-rhizosphere soil of Panax ginseng are driven by different cultivation modes and increased cultivation periods PeerJ 2020 8 e9930 10.7717/peerj.9930 33088612
Bao Y, Qi B, Huang W, Liu B, Li Y. The fungal community in non-rhizosphere soil of Panax ginseng are driven by different cultivation modes and increased cultivation periods. PeerJ. 2020;8: e9930. 10.7717/peerj.9930.33088612 10.7717/peerj.9930
62. Freitas L Appolinario L Calegario G Glacial-interglacial transitions in microbiomes recorded in deep-sea sediments from the western equatorial Atlantic Sci Total Environ 2020 746 140904 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140904 32763595
Freitas L, Appolinario L, Calegario G, et al. Glacial-interglacial transitions in microbiomes recorded in deep-sea sediments from the western equatorial Atlantic. Sci Total Environ. 2020;746: 140904. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140904.32763595 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140904
63. Neira P Henríquez-Castillo C Ortiz J Stolpe N Dube F Do different densities of tree cover affect pasture biomass and soil microbial communities? Agrofor Syst 2021 95 1465 1478 10.1007/s10457-021-00653-3
Neira P, Henríquez-Castillo C, Ortiz J, Stolpe N, Dube F. Do different densities of tree cover affect pasture biomass and soil microbial communities? Agrofor Syst. 2021;95:1465–78. 10.1007/s10457-021-00653-3.10.1007/s10457-021-00653-3
64. Ruiz ON Brown LM Radwan O Bowen LL Gunasekera TS Mueller SS West ZJ Striebich RC Metagenomic characterization reveals complex association of soil hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 2021 157 105161 10.1016/j.ibiod.2020.105161
Ruiz ON, Brown LM, Radwan O, Bowen LL, Gunasekera TS, Mueller SS, West ZJ, Striebich RC. Metagenomic characterization reveals complex association of soil hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation. 2021;157: 105161. 10.1016/j.ibiod.2020.105161.10.1016/j.ibiod.2020.105161
65. Graziano S, Caldara M, Gullì M, Bevivino A, Maestri E, Marmiroli N. A metagenomic and gene expression analysis in wheat (T. durum) and maize (Z. mays) biofertilized with PGPM and biochar. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23:10376. 10.3390/ijms231810376.
66. Yang J Lee J Choi J Ma L Heaton EA Howe A Response of total (DNA) and metabolically active (RNA) microbial communities in miscanthus x giganteus cultivated soil to different nitrogen fertilization rates Microbiol Spectr 2022 10 e02116 e2121 10.1128/spectrum.02116-21
Yang J, Lee J, Choi J, Ma L, Heaton EA, Howe A. Response of total (DNA) and metabolically active (RNA) microbial communities in miscanthus x giganteus cultivated soil to different nitrogen fertilization rates. Microbiol Spectr. 2022;10:e02116-e2121. 10.1128/spectrum.02116-21.10.1128/spectrum.02116-21
67. Li X Kong P Daughtrey M Kosta K Schirmer S Howle M Likins M Hong C Characterization of the soil bacterial community from selected boxwood gardens across the United States Microorganisms 2022 10 1514 10.3390/microorganisms1008151414 35893572
Li X, Kong P, Daughtrey M, Kosta K, Schirmer S, Howle M, Likins M, Hong C. Characterization of the soil bacterial community from selected boxwood gardens across the United States. Microorganisms. 2022;10:1514. 10.3390/microorganisms1008151414.35893572 10.3390/microorganisms1008151414
68. Xing H Zhang Y Krämer M Kissmann AK Henkel M Weil T Knippschild U Rosenau F A polyclonal selex aptamer library directly allows specific labelling of the human gut bacterium Blautia producta without isolating individual aptamers Molecules 2022 27 5693 10.3390/molecules27175693 36080459
Xing H, Zhang Y, Krämer M, Kissmann AK, Henkel M, Weil T, Knippschild U, Rosenau F. A polyclonal selex aptamer library directly allows specific labelling of the human gut bacterium Blautia producta without isolating individual aptamers. Molecules. 2022;27:5693. 10.3390/molecules27175693.36080459 10.3390/molecules27175693
69. Mishra A Singh D Hathi Z Purohit HJ Jessy MD Philip A Uthup TK Singh L Soil microbiome dynamics associated with conversion of tropical forests to different rubber based land use management systems Appl Soil Ecol 2023 188 104933 10.1016/j.apsoil.2023.104933
Mishra A, Singh D, Hathi Z, Purohit HJ, Jessy MD, Philip A, Uthup TK, Singh L. Soil microbiome dynamics associated with conversion of tropical forests to different rubber based land use management systems. Appl Soil Ecol. 2023;188: 104933. 10.1016/j.apsoil.2023.104933.10.1016/j.apsoil.2023.104933
70. Santorelli LA Wilkinson T Abdulmalik R Rai Y Creevey CJ Huws S Gutierrez-Merino J Beehives possess their own distinct microbiomes Environ Microbiomes 2023 18 1 10.1186/s40793-023-00460-6
Santorelli LA, Wilkinson T, Abdulmalik R, Rai Y, Creevey CJ, Huws S, Gutierrez-Merino J. Beehives possess their own distinct microbiomes. Environ Microbiomes. 2023;18:1. 10.1186/s40793-023-00460-6.10.1186/s40793-023-00460-6
71. Schaerer L Ghannam R Olson A Van Camp A Techtmann S Persistence of location-specific microbial signatures on boats during voyages Mar Pollut Bull 2024 199 115884 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115884 38118397
Schaerer L, Ghannam R, Olson A, Van Camp A, Techtmann S. Persistence of location-specific microbial signatures on boats during voyages. Mar Pollut Bull. 2024;199: 115884. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115884.38118397 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115884
72. Thiele-Bruhn S Schloter M Wilke BM Beaudette LA Martin-Laurent F Cheviron N Mougin C Römbke J Identification of new microbial functional standards for soil quality assessment Soil 2020 6 17 34 10.5194/soil-6-17-2020
Thiele-Bruhn S, Schloter M, Wilke BM, Beaudette LA, Martin-Laurent F, Cheviron N, Mougin C, Römbke J. Identification of new microbial functional standards for soil quality assessment. Soil. 2020;6:17–34. 10.5194/soil-6-17-2020.10.5194/soil-6-17-2020
73. Legeay J Hijri M A comprehensive insight of current and future challenges in large-scale soil microbiome analyses Microb Ecol 2023 86 75 85 10.1007/s00248-022-02060-2 35739325
Legeay J, Hijri M. A comprehensive insight of current and future challenges in large-scale soil microbiome analyses. Microb Ecol. 2023;86:75–85. 10.1007/s00248-022-02060-2.35739325 10.1007/s00248-022-02060-2
74. Knight R Vrbanac A Taylor BC Best practices for analysing microbiomes Nat Rev Microbiol 2018 16 410 422 10.1038/s41579-018-0029-9 29795328
Knight R, Vrbanac A, Taylor BC, et al. Best practices for analysing microbiomes. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018;16:410–22. 10.1038/s41579-018-0029-9.29795328 10.1038/s41579-018-0029-9
75. Manetsberger J Caballero Gómez N Benomar N Christie G Abriouel H Characterization of the Culturable Sporobiota of Spanish Olive Groves and Its Tolerance toward Environmental Challenges Microbiol Spectr 2023 11 e04013 e4022 10.1128/spectrum.04013-22 36719235
Manetsberger J, Caballero Gómez N, Benomar N, Christie G, Abriouel H. Characterization of the culturable sporobiota of spanish olive groves and its tolerance toward environmental challenges. Microbiol Spectr. 2023;11:e04013-e4022. 10.1128/spectrum.04013-22.36719235 10.1128/spectrum.04013-22
76. Kapinusova G Lopez Marin MA Uhlik O Reaching unreachables: Obstacles and successes of microbial cultivation and their reasons Front Microbiol 2023 14 1089630 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1089630 36960281
Kapinusova G, Lopez Marin MA, Uhlik O. Reaching unreachables: Obstacles and successes of microbial cultivation and their reasons. Front Microbiol. 2023;14:1089630. 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1089630.36960281 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1089630
77. Renella G Ogunseitan O Giagnoni L Arenella M Environmental proteomics: A long march in the pedosphere Soil Biol Biochem 2014 69 34 37 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.10.035
Renella G, Ogunseitan O, Giagnoni L, Arenella M. Environmental proteomics: A long march in the pedosphere. Soil Biol Biochem. 2014;69:34–7. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.10.035.10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.10.035
78. Nickel JC Stephens A Landis JR Chen J Mullins C Van Bokhoven A Lucia MS Melton-Kreft R Ehrlich GD Search for microorganisms in men with urologic chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A culture-independent analysis in the MAPP research network J Urol 2015 194 127 135 10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.037 25596358
Nickel JC, Stephens A, Landis JR, Chen J, Mullins C, Van Bokhoven A, Lucia MS, Melton-Kreft R, Ehrlich GD. Search for microorganisms in men with urologic chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A culture-independent analysis in the MAPP research network. J Urol. 2015;194:127–35. 10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.037.25596358 10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.037
79. Kaeberlein T Lewis K Epstein SS Isolating “Uncultivable” Microorganisms in Pure Culture in a Simulated Natural Environment Science 2002 296 1127 1129 10.1126/science.1070633 12004133
Kaeberlein T, Lewis K, Epstein SS. Isolating “Uncultivable” Microorganisms in Pure culture in a simulated natural environment. Science. 2002;296:1127–9. 10.1126/science.1070633.12004133 10.1126/science.1070633
80. Bollmann A Lewis K Epstein SS Incubation of environmental samples in a diffusion chamber increases the diversity of recovered isolates Appl Environ Microbiol 2007 73 6386 6390 10.1128/AEM.01309-07 17720826
Bollmann A, Lewis K, Epstein SS. Incubation of environmental samples in a diffusion chamber increases the diversity of recovered isolates. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73:6386–90. 10.1128/AEM.01309-07.17720826 10.1128/AEM.01309-07
81. Hu T Chitnis N Monos D Dinh A Next-generation sequencing technologies: An overview Hum Immunol 2021 82 801 811 10.1016/j.humimm.2021.02.012 33745759
Hu T, Chitnis N, Monos D, Dinh A. Next-generation sequencing technologies: An overview. Hum Immunol. 2021;82:801–11. 10.1016/j.humimm.2021.02.012.33745759 10.1016/j.humimm.2021.02.012
82. Heather JM Chain B The sequence of sequencers: The history of sequencing DNA Genomics 2016 107 1 8 10.1016/j.ygeno.2015.11.003 26554401
Heather JM, Chain B. The sequence of sequencers: The history of sequencing DNA. Genomics. 2016;107:1–8. 10.1016/j.ygeno.2015.11.003.26554401 10.1016/j.ygeno.2015.11.003
83. Liu H, Wu S, Li A, Ruan J. SMARTdenovo: a de novo assembler using long nosiy reads. GigaByte. 2021;2021:1–9. 10.46471/gigabyte.15.
84. Lischer HEL Shimizu KK Reference-guided de novo assembly approach improves genome reconstruction for related species BMC Bioinformatics 2017 18 474 10.1186/s12859-017-1911-6 29126390
Lischer HEL, Shimizu KK. Reference-guided de novo assembly approach improves genome reconstruction for related species. BMC Bioinformatics. 2017;18:474. 10.1186/s12859-017-1911-6.29126390 10.1186/s12859-017-1911-6
85. Lee JY Mitchell HD Burnet MC Uncovering Hidden Members and Functions of the Soil Microbiome Using de Novo Metaproteomics J Proteome Res 2022 21 2023 2035 10.1021/acs.jproteome.2c00334 35793793
Lee JY, Mitchell HD, Burnet MC, et al. Uncovering Hidden Members and Functions of the Soil Microbiome Using de Novo Metaproteomics. J Proteome Res. 2022;21:2023–35. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.2c00334.35793793 10.1021/acs.jproteome.2c00334
86. Burstein HJ Demichele A Somerfield MR Henry NL Testing for ESR1 Mutations to Guide Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update J Clin Oncol 2023 41 3423 3425 10.1200/JCO.23.00638 37196213
Burstein HJ, Demichele A, Somerfield MR, Henry NL. Testing for ESR1 Mutations to guide therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:3423–5. 10.1200/JCO.23.00638.37196213 10.1200/JCO.23.00638
87. Pujol P Barberis M Beer P Clinical practice guidelines for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing Eur J Cancer 2021 146 30 47 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.12.023 33578357
Pujol P, Barberis M, Beer P, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing. Eur J Cancer. 2021;146:30–47. 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.12.023.33578357 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.12.023
88. Kaster A-K Sobol MS Microbial single-cell omics: the crux of the matter Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2020 104 8209 8220 10.1007/s00253-020-10844-0 32845367
Kaster A-K, Sobol MS. Microbial single-cell omics: the crux of the matter. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2020;104:8209–20. 10.1007/s00253-020-10844-0.32845367 10.1007/s00253-020-10844-0
89. Dey SS Kester L Spanjaard B Bienko M Van Oudenaarden A Integrated genome and transcriptome sequencing of the same cell Nat Biotechnol 2015 33 285 289 10.1038/nbt.3129 25599178
Dey SS, Kester L, Spanjaard B, Bienko M, Van Oudenaarden A. Integrated genome and transcriptome sequencing of the same cell. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:285–9. 10.1038/nbt.3129.25599178 10.1038/nbt.3129
90. Su T Hollas MAR Fellers RT Kelleher NL Identification of Splice Variants and Isoforms in Transcriptomics and Proteomics Annu Rev Biomed Data Sci 2023 6 357 376 10.1146/annurev-biodatasci-020722-044021 37561601
Su T, Hollas MAR, Fellers RT, Kelleher NL. Identification of Splice Variants and Isoforms in Transcriptomics and Proteomics. Annu Rev Biomed Data Sci. 2023;6:357–76. 10.1146/annurev-biodatasci-020722-044021.37561601 10.1146/annurev-biodatasci-020722-044021
91. Wesener DA, Beller ZW, Peters SL, Rajabi A, Dimartino G, Giannone RJ, Hettich RL, Gordon JI. Microbiota functional activity biosensors for characterizing nutrient metabolism in vivo. eLife. 2021;10:e64478. 10.7554/eLife.64478.
92. Sun B Liu Z Liu J Zhao S Wang L Wang F The utility of proteases in proteomics, from sequence profiling to structure and function analysis Proteomics 2023 23 2200132 10.1002/pmic.202200132
Sun B, Liu Z, Liu J, Zhao S, Wang L, Wang F. The utility of proteases in proteomics, from sequence profiling to structure and function analysis. Proteomics. 2023;23:2200132. 10.1002/pmic.202200132.10.1002/pmic.202200132
93. Clark TN Houriet J Vidar WS Kellogg JJ Todd DA Cech NB Linington RG Interlaboratory Comparison of Untargeted Mass Spectrometry Data Uncovers Underlying Causes for Variability J Nat Prod 2021 84 824 835 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.0c01376 33666420
Clark TN, Houriet J, Vidar WS, Kellogg JJ, Todd DA, Cech NB, Linington RG. Interlaboratory comparison of untargeted mass spectrometry data uncovers underlying causes for variability. J Nat Prod. 2021;84:824–35. 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.0c01376.33666420 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.0c01376
94. Satam H Joshi K Mangrolia U Next-generation sequencing technology: Current trends and advancements Biology 2023 12 997 10.3390/biology12070997 37508427
Satam H, Joshi K, Mangrolia U, et al. Next-generation sequencing technology: Current trends and advancements. Biology. 2023;12:997. 10.3390/biology12070997.37508427 10.3390/biology12070997
95. Delventhal K Skillman V Li X Busby PE Frost K Characterizing Variation in the Bacterial and Fungal Tare Soil Microbiome of Seed Potato Phytobiomes J 2023 7 78 90 10.1094/PBIOMES-11-22-0092-R
Delventhal K, Skillman V, Li X, Busby PE, Frost K. Characterizing variation in the bacterial and fungal tare soil microbiome of seed potato. Phytobiomes J. 2023;7:78–90. 10.1094/PBIOMES-11-22-0092-R.10.1094/PBIOMES-11-22-0092-R
96. Osman JR Fernandes GR Kamilova E DuBow MS Genomic microbiome analyses of surface sand samples from the Kyzyl-Kum Desert (Uzbekistan): characterization and comparative study Arch Microbiol 2023 205 90 10.1007/s00203-023-03432-z 36780035
Osman JR, Fernandes GR, Kamilova E, DuBow MS. Genomic microbiome analyses of surface sand samples from the Kyzyl-Kum Desert (Uzbekistan): characterization and comparative study. Arch Microbiol. 2023;205:90. 10.1007/s00203-023-03432-z.36780035 10.1007/s00203-023-03432-z
97. Roy S Coldren C Karunamurthy A Standards and Guidelines for Validating Next-Generation Sequencing Bioinformatics Pipelines: A Joint Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists J Mol Diagn 2018 20 4 27 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2017.11.003 29154853
Roy S, Coldren C, Karunamurthy A, et al. Standards and Guidelines for Validating Next-Generation Sequencing Bioinformatics Pipelines: A Joint Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists. J Mol Diagn. 2018;20:4–27. 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2017.11.003.29154853 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2017.11.003
98. Svartström O Alneberg J Terrapon N Ninety-nine de novo assembled genomes from the moose (Alces alces) rumen microbiome provide new insights into microbial plant biomass degradation ISME J 2017 11 2538 2551 10.1038/ismej.2017.108 28731473
Svartström O, Alneberg J, Terrapon N, et al. Ninety-nine de novo assembled genomes from the moose (Alces alces) rumen microbiome provide new insights into microbial plant biomass degradation. ISME J. 2017;11:2538–51. 10.1038/ismej.2017.108.28731473 10.1038/ismej.2017.108
99. Zhang X Li L Butcher J Stintzi A Figeys D Advancing functional and translational microbiome research using meta-omics approaches Microbiome 2019 7 154 10.1186/s40168-019-0767-6 31810497
Zhang X, Li L, Butcher J, Stintzi A, Figeys D. Advancing functional and translational microbiome research using meta-omics approaches. Microbiome. 2019;7:154. 10.1186/s40168-019-0767-6.31810497 10.1186/s40168-019-0767-6
100. Bashiardes S Zilberman-Schapira G Elinav E Use of metatranscriptomics in microbiome research Bioinform Biol Insights 2016 10 19 25 10.4137/BBI.S34610 27127406
Bashiardes S, Zilberman-Schapira G, Elinav E. Use of metatranscriptomics in microbiome research. Bioinform Biol Insights. 2016;10:19–25. 10.4137/BBI.S34610.27127406 10.4137/BBI.S34610
101. Shakya M Lo CC Chain PSG Advances and challenges in metatranscriptomic analysis Front Genet 2019 10 904 10.3389/fgene.2019.00904 31608125
Shakya M, Lo CC, Chain PSG. Advances and challenges in metatranscriptomic analysis. Front Genet. 2019;10:904. 10.3389/fgene.2019.00904.31608125 10.3389/fgene.2019.00904
102. Wang Y Zhou Y Xiao X Zheng J Zhou H Metaproteomics: A strategy to study the taxonomy and functionality of the gut microbiota J Proteomics 2020 219 103737 10.1016/j.jprot.2020.103737 32198072
Wang Y, Zhou Y, Xiao X, Zheng J, Zhou H. Metaproteomics: A strategy to study the taxonomy and functionality of the gut microbiota. J Proteomics. 2020;219: 103737. 10.1016/j.jprot.2020.103737.32198072 10.1016/j.jprot.2020.103737
103. Utpott M, Rodrigues E, Rios A de O, Mercali GD, Flôres SH. Metabolomics: An analytical technique for food processing evaluation. Food Chem. 2022;366:130685. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.130685.
104. Mandakovic D Maldonado J Pulgar R Cabrera P Gaete A Urtuvia V Seeger M Cambiazo V González M Microbiome analysis and bacterial isolation from Lejía Lake soil in Atacama Desert Extremophiles 2018 22 665 673 10.1007/s00792-018-1027-6 29687212
Mandakovic D, Maldonado J, Pulgar R, Cabrera P, Gaete A, Urtuvia V, Seeger M, Cambiazo V, González M. Microbiome analysis and bacterial isolation from Lejía Lake soil in Atacama Desert. Extremophiles. 2018;22:665–73. 10.1007/s00792-018-1027-6.29687212 10.1007/s00792-018-1027-6
105. Cordier T Lanzén A Apothéloz-Perret-Gentil L Stoeck T Pawlowski J Embracing environmental genomics and machine learning for routine biomonitoring Trends Microbiol 2019 27 387 397 10.1016/j.tim.2018.10.012 30554770
Cordier T, Lanzén A, Apothéloz-Perret-Gentil L, Stoeck T, Pawlowski J. Embracing environmental genomics and machine learning for routine biomonitoring. Trends Microbiol. 2019;27:387–97. 10.1016/j.tim.2018.10.012.30554770 10.1016/j.tim.2018.10.012
106. Jiang X Xu W Park EK Li G Selecting protein families for environmental features based on manifold regularization IEEE Trans Nanobiosci 2014 13 104 108 10.1109/TNB.2014.2316744
Jiang X, Xu W, Park EK, Li G. Selecting protein families for environmental features based on manifold regularization. IEEE Trans Nanobiosci. 2014;13:104–8. 10.1109/TNB.2014.2316744.10.1109/TNB.2014.2316744
107. McElhinney JMWR Catacutan MK Mawart A Hasan A Dias J Interfacing machine learning and microbial omics: a promising means to address environmental challenges Front Microbiol 2022 13 851450 10.3389/fmicb.2022.851450 35547145
McElhinney JMWR, Catacutan MK, Mawart A, Hasan A, Dias J. Interfacing machine learning and microbial omics: a promising means to address environmental challenges. Front Microbiol. 2022;13: 851450. 10.3389/fmicb.2022.851450.35547145 10.3389/fmicb.2022.851450
108. Jansson JK McClure R Egbert RG Soil microbiome engineering for sustainability in a changing environment Nat Biotechnol 2023 41 1716 1728 10.1038/s41587-023-01932-3 37903921
Jansson JK, McClure R, Egbert RG. Soil microbiome engineering for sustainability in a changing environment. Nat Biotechnol. 2023;41:1716–28. 10.1038/s41587-023-01932-3.37903921 10.1038/s41587-023-01932-3
109. Fittipaldi M Nocker A Codony F Progress in understanding preferential detection of live cells using viability dyes in combination with DNA amplification J Microbiol Meth 2012 91 276 289 10.1016/j.mimet.2012.08.007
Fittipaldi M, Nocker A, Codony F. Progress in understanding preferential detection of live cells using viability dyes in combination with DNA amplification. J Microbiol Meth. 2012;91:276–89. 10.1016/j.mimet.2012.08.007.10.1016/j.mimet.2012.08.007
110. Nocker A, Cheung CY, Camper AK. Comparison of propidium monoazide with ethidium monoazide for differentiation of live vs. dead bacteria by selective removal of DNA from dead cells. J Microbiol Meth. 2006;67:310–320. 10.1016/j.mimet.2006.04.015.
111. Wallace A. Absolute Quantification of Microbiota in Shotgun Sequencing Using Host Cells or Spike-Ins. bioRxiv 2023.08.23.554046. 10.1101/2023.08.23.554046.
112. Perron GG Whyte L Turnbaugh PJ Goordial J Hanage WP Dantas G Desai MM Functional characterization of bacteria isolated from ancient arctic soil exposes diverse resistance mechanisms to modern antibiotics PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0069533 10.1371/journal.pone.0069533 25807523
Perron GG, Whyte L, Turnbaugh PJ, Goordial J, Hanage WP, Dantas G, Desai MM. Functional characterization of bacteria isolated from ancient arctic soil exposes diverse resistance mechanisms to modern antibiotics. PLoS ONE. 2015;10: e0069533. 10.1371/journal.pone.0069533.25807523 10.1371/journal.pone.0069533
113. Nagaishi T Watabe T Kotake K Immunoglobulin A-specific deficiency induces spontaneous inflammation specifically in the ileum Gut 2022 71 487 496 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322873 33963042
Nagaishi T, Watabe T, Kotake K, et al. Immunoglobulin A-specific deficiency induces spontaneous inflammation specifically in the ileum. Gut. 2022;71:487–96. 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322873.33963042 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322873
114. Talley S, Bonomo R, Gavini C, et al. Monitoring of inflammation using novel biosensor mouse model reveals tissue- and sex-specific responses to Western diet. Dis Model Mech. 2022;15:dmm049313. 10.1242/DMM.049313.
115. Wang M Yang Y Min J A wearable electrochemical biosensor for the monitoring of metabolites and nutrients Nat Biomed Eng 2022 6 1225 1235 10.1038/s41551-022-00916-z 35970928
Wang M, Yang Y, Min J, et al. A wearable electrochemical biosensor for the monitoring of metabolites and nutrients. Nat Biomed Eng. 2022;6:1225–35. 10.1038/s41551-022-00916-z.35970928 10.1038/s41551-022-00916-z
116. Zhang Y Hu Y Jiang N Yetisen AK Wearable artificial intelligence biosensor networks Biosens Bioelectron 2023 219 114825 10.1016/j.bios.2022.114825 36306563
Zhang Y, Hu Y, Jiang N, Yetisen AK. Wearable artificial intelligence biosensor networks. Biosens Bioelectron. 2023;219: 114825. 10.1016/j.bios.2022.114825.36306563 10.1016/j.bios.2022.114825
117. O’Farrell B. Evolution in lateral flow–based immunoassay systems. In: Lateral Flow Immunoassay. Humana Press, 2009; pp 1–33. 10.1007/978-1-59745-240-3_1.
118. Yoon J-Y. Introduction to biosensors: from electric circuits to immunosensors, Second Edition. Springer, 2016; Chapter 13. 10.1007/978-3-319-27413-3_13.
119. Markus V Share O Shagan M Inhibitory effects of artificial sweeteners on bacterial quorum sensing Int J Mol Sci 2021 22 9863 10.3390/ijms22189863 34576027
Markus V, Share O, Shagan M, et al. Inhibitory effects of artificial sweeteners on bacterial quorum sensing. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:9863. 10.3390/ijms22189863.34576027 10.3390/ijms22189863
120. Sazykin I, Naumova E, Azhogina T, Klimova M, Karchava S, Khmelevtsova L, Chernyshenko E, Litsevich A, Khammami M, Sazykina M. Glyphosate effect on biofilms formation, mutagenesis and stress response of E. coli. J Hazard Mater. 2024;461:132574. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.132574.
121. O’Connor G, Quintero MA, Deo SK, Abreu MT, Daunert S. Bacterial quorum-sensing molecules in serum: A potential tool for Crohn’s disease management. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2022;13:e00547. 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000547.
122. Nuñez S Barra M Garrido D Developing a fluorescent inducible system for free fucose quantification in Escherichia coli Biosensors 2023 13 388 10.3390/bios13030388 36979599
Nuñez S, Barra M, Garrido D. Developing a fluorescent inducible system for free fucose quantification in Escherichia coli. Biosensors. 2023;13:388. 10.3390/bios13030388.36979599 10.3390/bios13030388
123. Serebrinsky-Duek K Barra M Danino T Garrido D Engineered bacteria for short-chain-fatty-acid-repressed expression of biotherapeutic molecules Microbiol Spectr 2023 11 e00049 e123 10.1128/spectrum.00049-23 36939337
Serebrinsky-Duek K, Barra M, Danino T, Garrido D. Engineered bacteria for short-chain-fatty-acid-repressed expression of biotherapeutic molecules. Microbiol Spectr. 2023;11:e00049-e123. 10.1128/spectrum.00049-23.36939337 10.1128/spectrum.00049-23
124. Guan C Larson PJ Fleming E Tikhonov AP Mootien S Grossman TH Golino C Oh J Engineering a “detect and destroy” skin probiotic to combat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus PLoS ONE 2022 17 e0276795 10.1371/journal.pone.0276795 36520793
Guan C, Larson PJ, Fleming E, Tikhonov AP, Mootien S, Grossman TH, Golino C, Oh J. Engineering a “detect and destroy” skin probiotic to combat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. PLoS ONE. 2022;17: e0276795. 10.1371/journal.pone.0276795.36520793 10.1371/journal.pone.0276795
125. Purohit B Vernekar PR Shetti NP Chandra P Biosensor nanoengineering: Design, operation, and implementation for biomolecular analysis Sens Int 2020 1 100040 10.1016/j.sintl.2020.10004040
Purohit B, Vernekar PR, Shetti NP, Chandra P. Biosensor nanoengineering: Design, operation, and implementation for biomolecular analysis. Sens Int. 2020;1: 100040. 10.1016/j.sintl.2020.10004040.10.1016/j.sintl.2020.10004040
126. Kour R Arya S Young S-J Gupta V Bandhoria P Khosla A Review—Recent advances in carbon nanomaterials as electrochemical biosensors J Electrochem Soc 2020 167 037555 10.1149/1945-7111/ab6bc4
Kour R, Arya S, Young S-J, Gupta V, Bandhoria P, Khosla A. Review—Recent advances in carbon nanomaterials as electrochemical biosensors. J Electrochem Soc. 2020;167: 037555. 10.1149/1945-7111/ab6bc4.10.1149/1945-7111/ab6bc4
127. Ostadhossein F Moitra P Alafeef M Ensemble and single-particle level fluorescent fine-tuning of carbon dots via positional changes of amines toward “supervised” oral microbiome sensing J Biomed Opt 2023 28 082807 10.1117/1.jbo.28.8.082807 37427335
Ostadhossein F, Moitra P, Alafeef M, et al. Ensemble and single-particle level fluorescent fine-tuning of carbon dots via positional changes of amines toward “supervised” oral microbiome sensing. J Biomed Opt. 2023;28: 082807. 10.1117/1.jbo.28.8.082807.37427335 10.1117/1.jbo.28.8.082807
128. Melnikov PV, Alexandrovskaya AY, Naumova AO, Popova NM, Spitsyn B V., Zaitsev NK, Yashtulov NA. Modified nanodiamonds as a means of polymer surface functionalization. From fouling suppression to biosensor design. Nanomaterials. 2021;11:2980. 10.3390/nano11112980.
129. Singh A Sharma A Ahmed A Sundramoorthy AK Furukawa H Arya S Khosla A Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors: Applications, challenges, and future scope Biosensors 2021 11 336 10.3390/bios11090336 34562926
Singh A, Sharma A, Ahmed A, Sundramoorthy AK, Furukawa H, Arya S, Khosla A. Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors: Applications, challenges, and future scope. Biosensors. 2021;11:336. 10.3390/bios11090336.34562926 10.3390/bios11090336
130. Costanzo H Gooch J Frascione N Nanomaterials for optical biosensors in forensic analysis Talanta 2023 253 123945 10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123945 36191514
Costanzo H, Gooch J, Frascione N. Nanomaterials for optical biosensors in forensic analysis. Talanta. 2023;253: 123945. 10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123945.36191514 10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123945
131. Teng M Hao M Ding C Wang L Shen H Yu S Chen L Yang F Rapid detection of Saccharomyces cerevisiae with boronic acid-decorated multivariate metal-organic frameworks and aptamers Analyst 2023 148 4213 4218 10.1039/D3AN00835E 37539700
Teng M, Hao M, Ding C, Wang L, Shen H, Yu S, Chen L, Yang F. Rapid detection of Saccharomyces cerevisiae with boronic acid-decorated multivariate metal-organic frameworks and aptamers. Analyst. 2023;148:4213–8. 10.1039/D3AN00835E.37539700 10.1039/D3AN00835E
132. Pellegrino GM Browne TS Sharath K Bari KA Vancuren SJ Allen-Vercoe E Gloor GB Edgell DR Metabolically-targeted dCas9 expression in bacteria Nucleic Acids Res 2023 51 982 996 10.1093/nar/gkac1248 36629257
Pellegrino GM, Browne TS, Sharath K, Bari KA, Vancuren SJ, Allen-Vercoe E, Gloor GB, Edgell DR. Metabolically-targeted dCas9 expression in bacteria. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51:982–96. 10.1093/nar/gkac1248.36629257 10.1093/nar/gkac1248
133. Enespa CP Tool and techniques study to plant microbiome current understanding and future needs: An overview Commun Integr Biol 2022 15 209 225 10.1080/19420889.2022.2082736 35967908
Enespa CP. Tool and techniques study to plant microbiome current understanding and future needs: An overview. Commun Integr Biol. 2022;15:209–25. 10.1080/19420889.2022.2082736.35967908 10.1080/19420889.2022.2082736
134. Li G Yuan B Zhao L Gao W Xu C Liu G Fouling-resistant electrode for electrochemical sensing based on covalent-organic frameworks TpPA-1 dispersed cabon nanotubes Talanta 2024 267 125162 10.1016/j.talanta.2023.125162 37688894
Li G, Yuan B, Zhao L, Gao W, Xu C, Liu G. Fouling-resistant electrode for electrochemical sensing based on covalent-organic frameworks TpPA-1 dispersed cabon nanotubes. Talanta. 2024;267: 125162. 10.1016/j.talanta.2023.125162.37688894 10.1016/j.talanta.2023.125162
135. Jarosińska E Zambrowska Z Witkowska NE Methods of protection of electrochemical sensors against biofouling in cell culture applications ACS Omega 2024 9 4572 4580 10.1021/acsomega.3c07660 38313548
Jarosińska E, Zambrowska Z, Witkowska NE. Methods of protection of electrochemical sensors against biofouling in cell culture applications. ACS Omega. 2024;9:4572–80. 10.1021/acsomega.3c07660.38313548 10.1021/acsomega.3c07660
136. Cesewski E Johnson BN Electrochemical biosensors for pathogen detection Biosens Bioelectron 2020 159 112214 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112214 32364936
Cesewski E, Johnson BN. Electrochemical biosensors for pathogen detection. Biosens Bioelectron. 2020;159: 112214. 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112214.32364936 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112214
137. McCracken KE Angus SV Reynolds KA Yoon JY Multimodal imaging and lighting bias correction for improved μPAD-based water quality monitoring via smartphones Sci Rep 2016 6 27529 10.1038/srep27529 27283336
McCracken KE, Angus SV, Reynolds KA, Yoon JY. Multimodal imaging and lighting bias correction for improved μPAD-based water quality monitoring via smartphones. Sci Rep. 2016;6:27529. 10.1038/srep27529.27283336 10.1038/srep27529
138. Ulep TH Zenhausern R Gonzales A Knoff DS Lengerke Diaz PA Castro JE Yoon JY Smartphone based on-chip fluorescence imaging and capillary flow velocity measurement for detecting ROR1+ cancer cells from buffy coat blood samples on dual-layer paper microfluidic chip Biosens Bioelectron 2020 153 112042 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112042 32056660
Ulep TH, Zenhausern R, Gonzales A, Knoff DS, Lengerke Diaz PA, Castro JE, Yoon JY. Smartphone based on-chip fluorescence imaging and capillary flow velocity measurement for detecting ROR1+ cancer cells from buffy coat blood samples on dual-layer paper microfluidic chip. Biosens Bioelectron. 2020;153: 112042. 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112042.32056660 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112042
139. Breshears LE, Nguyen BT, Akarapipad P, Sosnowski K, Kaarj K, Quirk G, Uhrlaub JL, Nikolich-Žugich J, Worobey M, Yoon JY. Sensitive, smartphone-based SARS-CoV-2 detection from clinical saline gargle samples. PNAS Nexus. 2022;1:pgac028. 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac028.
140. Buchanan BC Safavinia B Wu L Yoon JY Smartphone-based autofluorescence imaging to detect bacterial species on laboratory surfaces Analyst 2022 147 2980 2987 10.1039/D2AN00358A 35648102
Buchanan BC, Safavinia B, Wu L, Yoon JY. Smartphone-based autofluorescence imaging to detect bacterial species on laboratory surfaces. Analyst. 2022;147:2980–7. 10.1039/D2AN00358A.35648102 10.1039/D2AN00358A
141. Kim S Lee MH Wiwasuku T Day AS Youngme S Hwang DS Yoon JY Human sensor-inspired supervised machine learning of smartphone-based paper microfluidic analysis for bacterial species classification Biosens Bioelectron 2021 188 113335 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113335 34030093
Kim S, Lee MH, Wiwasuku T, Day AS, Youngme S, Hwang DS, Yoon JY. Human sensor-inspired supervised machine learning of smartphone-based paper microfluidic analysis for bacterial species classification. Biosens Bioelectron. 2021;188: 113335. 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113335.34030093 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113335
142. Breshears LE Mata-Robles S Tang Y Baker JC Reynolds KA Yoon JY Rapid, sensitive detection of PFOA with smartphone-based flow rate analysis utilizing competitive molecular interactions during capillary action J Hazard Mater 2023 446 130699 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130699 36603430
Breshears LE, Mata-Robles S, Tang Y, Baker JC, Reynolds KA, Yoon JY. Rapid, sensitive detection of PFOA with smartphone-based flow rate analysis utilizing competitive molecular interactions during capillary action. J Hazard Mater. 2023;446: 130699. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130699.36603430 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130699
143. Liang Y Lee MH Zhou A Khanthaphixay B Hwang DS Yoon JY eXtreme gradient boosting-based classification of bacterial mixtures in water and milk using wireless microscopic imaging of quorum sensing peptide-conjugated particles Biosens Bioelectron 2023 227 115144 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115144 36805271
Liang Y, Lee MH, Zhou A, Khanthaphixay B, Hwang DS, Yoon JY. eXtreme gradient boosting-based classification of bacterial mixtures in water and milk using wireless microscopic imaging of quorum sensing peptide-conjugated particles. Biosens Bioelectron. 2023;227: 115144. 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115144.36805271 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115144
144. Kim S Sosnowski K Hwang DS Yoon JY Smartphone-Based Microalgae Monitoring Platform Using Machine Learning ACS ES&T Eng 2023 4 186 195 10.1021/acsestengg.3c0026
Kim S, Sosnowski K, Hwang DS, Yoon JY. Smartphone-based microalgae monitoring platform using machine learning. ACS ES&T Eng. 2023;4:186–95. 10.1021/acsestengg.3c0026.10.1021/acsestengg.3c0026
145. Wilhelm RC van Es HM Buckley DH Predicting measures of soil health using the microbiome and supervised machine learning Soil Biol Biochem 2022 164 108472 10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108472
Wilhelm RC, van Es HM, Buckley DH. Predicting measures of soil health using the microbiome and supervised machine learning. Soil Biol Biochem. 2022;164: 108472. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108472.10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108472
146. Chung S Loh A Jennings CM Sosnowski K Ha SY Yim UH Yoon JY Capillary flow velocity profile analysis on paper-based microfluidic chips for screening oil types using machine learning J Hazard Mater 2023 447 130806 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.130806 36680906
Chung S, Loh A, Jennings CM, Sosnowski K, Ha SY, Yim UH, Yoon JY. Capillary flow velocity profile analysis on paper-based microfluidic chips for screening oil types using machine learning. J Hazard Mater. 2023;447: 130806. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.130806.36680906 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.130806
147. Toma K Iwasaki K Zhang G Iitani K Arakawa T Iwasaki Y Mitsubayashi K Biochemical methanol gas sensor (MeOH bio-sniffer) for non-invasive assessment of intestinal flora from breath methanol Sensors 2021 21 4897 10.3390/s21144897 34300636
Toma K, Iwasaki K, Zhang G, Iitani K, Arakawa T, Iwasaki Y, Mitsubayashi K. Biochemical methanol gas sensor (MeOH bio-sniffer) for non-invasive assessment of intestinal flora from breath methanol. Sensors. 2021;21:4897. 10.3390/s21144897.34300636 10.3390/s21144897
