What if publication bias is the rule and net carbon loss from priming the exception?

Priming effects in soil science describe the influence of fresh carbon (C) inputs on rates of microbial mineralisation of native soil organic matter, which can either increase (positive priming) or decrease (negative priming). While both positive and negative priming effects occur in natural ecosystems, the latter is less documented in the peer-reviewed literature and the overall impact of priming effects on the C balance of vegetated ecosystems remains elusive. Here, we highlight three aspects which need to be discussed to ensure (rhizosphere) priming effects are correctly perceived in their ecological context and measured at appropriate scales: (i) We emphasize the importance of evaluating net C balances because usually experimental C inputs exceed C-losses meaning even positive priming doesn't cause net C-loss; (ii) We caution against publication bias, which forces over-representation of positive priming effects, neglects negative or no priming, and potentially misguides conclusions about C-loss; and (iii) We highlight the need to distinguish between general priming effects and rhizosphere-specific priming, which differ in their scale and driving factors, and hence require different methodological approaches. Future research should focus on scalable experiments linking priming to plant nutrition via C, nutrient and water cycling to understand priming in context of ecosystem functioning.