When microbes and consumers determine the limiting nutrient of autotrophs: a theoretical analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological stoichiometry postulates that differential nutrient recycling of elements such as nitrogen and phosphorus by consumers can shift the element that limits plant growth. However, this hypothesis has so far considered the effect of consumers, mostly herbivores, out of their food-web context. Microbial decomposers are important components of food webs, and might prove as important as consumers in changing the availability of elements for plants. In this theoretical study, we investigate how decomposers determine the nutrient that limits plants, both by feeding on nutrients and organic carbon released by plants and consumers, and by being fed upon by omnivorous consumers. We show that decomposers can greatly alter the relative availability of nutrients for plants. The type of limiting nutrient promoted by decomposers depends on their own elemental composition and, when applicable, on their ingestion by consumers. Our results highlight the limitations of previous stoichiometric theories of plant nutrient limitation control, which often ignored trophic levels other than plants and herbivores. They also suggest that detrital chains play an important role in determining plant nutrient limitation in many ecosystems.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".