The relationship between environmental complexity, species diversity and productivity in a natural reconstructed yeast community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diversity, whether ecological or genetic, is widely believed to be beneficial to the functioning of ecosystems. Although many studies have investigated relationships between environmental complexity, species diversity and ecosystem function, few have examined these factors simultaneously. We propagated combinations of three naturally coexisting yeast species for 200 generations, in environments of increasing complexity represented by combinations of up to eight different carbon sources. We found that competitive ability was transitive, and not related to productivity, which was equal among the species. Species diversity had a positive effect on productivity and overyielding in mixtures was caused primarily by complementation. Environmental complexity and species diversity were positively correlated, though not significantly, and the sole case of coexistence of all three yeasts after 200 generations occurred on a single carbon source, melezitose. Environmental complexity also enhanced productivity, although this relationship failed, for unknown reasons, at the highest level of complexity. Our results suggest that maintaining species diversity contributes to ecosystem productivity, but that the mechanisms responsible for maintaining diversity may not be straightforward.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".