Available Organic Soil Phosphorus Has an Important Influence on Microbial Community Composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil acidity can have a potent influence on soil microbial composition and function, but it remains unclear if this influence is a direct response to the concentration of H + or an indirect response caused by the influence of pH on other soil chemical properties. We hypothesized that the composition and function of soil microorganisms would shift in response to decreases in the availability of inorganic P caused by mobilized Al. We tested this hypothesis at Dysart Woods, a mosaic of old growth and second growth mixed, mesophytic forest in eastern Ohio. We evaluated microbial community composition (phospholipid fatty acid [PLFA] analysis) and function (extracellular enzyme activity) in the context of P availability and common metrics of soil fertility. We observed a threshold response where available organic P (P o , i.e., bicarbonate‐extracted, molybdate‐unreactive P) dominated (∼80%) the availability of total available P when mobilized Al was present (>0.1 cmol c kg −1 ), but when Al was immobilized, available inorganic P (P i , i.e., bicarbonate‐extracted, molybdate‐reactive P) content was significantly greater (∼50%). Available P o significantly correlated ( r = 0.54) with acid phosphatase activity. Using nonmetric multidimensional scaling, we observed that PLFA composition ordination was significant along a gradient of soil pH and available P o Because the composition and function of the microbial community changes due to available P o , results suggest that microbial communities in acidic forest soils are functionally P limited. The availability of P o did not influence the microbial biomass, however, indicating that the microbial community compensates for the apparent P limitation by altering its composition.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".