Short-term fertilizer application alters phenotypic traits of symbiotic nitrogen fixing bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fertilizer application is a common anthropogenic alteration to terrestrial systems. Increased nutrient input can impact soil microbial diversity or function directly through altered soil environments, or indirectly through plant-microbe feedbacks, with potentially important effects on ecologically-important plant-associated mutualists. We investigated the impacts of plant fertilizer, containing all common macro and micronutrients on symbiotic nitrogen-fixing bacteria (rhizobia), a group of bacteria that are important for plant productivity and ecosystem function. We collected rhizobia nodule isolates from natural field soil that was treated with slow-release plant fertilizer over a single growing season and compared phenotypic traits related to free-living growth and host partner quality in these isolates to those of rhizobia from unfertilized soils. Through a series of single inoculation assays in controlled glasshouse conditions, we found that isolates from fertilized field soil provided legume hosts with higher mutualistic benefits. Through growth assays on media containing variable plant fertilizer concentrations, we found that plant fertilizer was generally beneficial for rhizobia growth. Rhizobia isolated from fertilized field soil had higher growth rates in the presence of plant fertilizer compared to isolates from unfertilized field soil, indicating that plant fertilizer application favoured rhizobia isolates with higher abilities to utilize fertilizer for free-living growth. We found a positive correlation between growth responses to fertilizer and mutualism benefits among isolates from fertilized field soil, demonstrating that variable plant fertilizer induces context-dependent genetic correlations, potentially changing the evolutionary trajectory of either trait through increased trait dependencies. Our study shows that short-term application is sufficient to alter the composition of rhizobia isolates in the population or community, either directly though changes in the soil chemistry or indirectly through altered host legume feedbacks, and is potentially a strong selective agent acting on natural rhizobia populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".