Composition of Soil Microbial Communities Enriched on a Mixture of Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil contaminated with C5+, which contained benzene (45%, wt/wt), dicyclopentadiene (DCPD) plus cyclopentadiene (together 20%), toluene (6%), styrene (3%), xylenes (2%), naphthalene (2%), and smaller quantities of other compounds, served as the source for isolation of 55 genomically distinct bacteria (standards). Use of benzene as a substrate by these bacteria was most widespread (31 of 44 standards tested), followed by toluene (23 of 44), xylenes (14 of 44), styrene (10 of 44), and naphthalene (10 of 44). Master filters containing denatured genomic DNAs of all 55 standards were used to analyze the community compositions of C5+ enrichment cultures by reverse sample genome probing (RSGP). The communities enriched from three contaminated soils were similar to those enriched from three uncontaminated soils from the same site. The compositions of these communities were time dependent and showed a succession of Pseudomonas and Rhodococcus spp. before convergence on a composition dominated by Alcaligenes spp. The dominant community members detected by RSGP were capable of benzene degradation at all stages of succession. The enrichments effectively degraded all C5+ components except DCPD. Overall, degradation of individual C5+ hydrocarbons followed first-order kinetics, with the highest rates of removal for benzene.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".