MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040685961 · doi:10.1111/oik.01215

Signatures of nutrient limitation and co‐limitation: responses of autotroph internal nutrient concentrations to nitrogen and phosphorus additions

2014· article· en· W2040685961 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNutrientPhosphorusAutotrophLimitingNitrogenChemistryEcosystemEnvironmental chemistryEcologyBiologyAnimal scienceBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humans are modifying the availability of nutrients such as nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), and it is therefore important to understand how these nutrients, independently or in combination, influence the growth and nutrient content of primary producers. Using meta‐analysis of 118 field and laboratory experiments in freshwater, marine and terrestrial ecosystems, we tested hypotheses about co‐limitation of N and P by comparing the effects of adding N alone, P alone, and both N and P together on internal N (e.g. %N, C:N) and P (e.g. %P, C:P) concentrations in autotroph communities. In particular, we tested the following predictions. First, if only one nutrient was limiting, addition of that nutrient should decrease the concentration of the other nutrient, but addition of the non‐limiting nutrient would have no effect on the internal concentration of the limiting nutrient. If community co‐limitation was occurring then addition of either nutrient should result in a decrease in the internal concentration of the other nutrient. Community co‐limitation could also result in no change – or even an increase – in N concentrations in response to P addition if P stimulated growth of N fixers. Finally, if biochemically dependent co‐limitation was occurring, addition of a limiting nutrient would not decrease, and could even increase, the concentration of the other, co‐limited nutrient. We found no general evidence for the decrease in the internal concentration of one nutrient due to addition of another nutrient. The one exception to this overall pattern was marine systems, where N addition decreased internal P concentrations. In contrast, P addition increased internal N concentrations across all experiments, consistent with co‐limitation. These results have important implications for understanding the roles that N and P play in controlling producer growth and internal nutrient accumulation as well as for managing the effects of nutrient enrichment in ecosystems. Synthesis On a global scale, humans have doubled nitrogen (N) inputs and quadrupled phosphorus (P) inputs relative to pre‐industrial levels. N and P fertilization influences autotroph internal nutrient concentrations and ratios and thereby affects a variety of community and ecosystem processes, including decomposition and consumer population dynamics. It is therefore critical to understand the effects of nutrient additions on the growth and nutrient concentrations of primary producers. We used meta‐analysis to evaluate the responses of autotroph internal N and P concentrations to additions of N, P, and N+P and make inferences about limitation and co‐limitation of N and P across marine, terrestrial, and freshwater ecosystems. We found little evidence for single‐nutrient limitation, highlighting the fact that multiple nutrients generally limit primary production.

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.

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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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