MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002504849 · doi:10.1086/679585

Patterns of Local Adaptation in Space and Time among Soil Bacteria

2015· article· en· W2002504849 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susanne A. Kraemer, Rees Kassen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Local adaptationBiological dispersalBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Ecological selectionEcologyDeciduousReciprocalDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our understanding of microbial biogeography has been governed by the dictum "Everything is everywhere, but the environment selects." In other words, the distribution of microbes is thought to occur in a regime of extensive dispersal and strong selection, generating local adaptation. However, direct tests of these assumptions are rare. Here, we investigate the extent of local adaptation in space and time of a collection of soil-derived microbial isolates, most belonging to the genus Pseudomonas, across a growing season from a deciduous forest in western Quebec, Canada, using a reciprocal transplant design. Average performance of all clones varied substantially in both space and time, in line with the expectation of strong selection in both dimensions. The behavior of genotype-by-environment variance in fitness and its components, responsiveness and inconsistency, in space and through time suggests that the strength of divergent selection increases as sites become more distant from each other in both dimensions. However, divergent selection was not strong enough to maintain different specialized types across the environments studied, which suggests that Pseudomonas and their close relatives are not locally adapted to the prevailing conditions of growth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207