Structure and resilience of fungal communities in Alaskan boreal forest soilsThis article is one of a selection of papers from The Dynamics of Change in Alaska’s Boreal Forests: Resilience and Vulnerability in Response to Climate Warming.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper outlines molecular analyses of soil fungi within the Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research program. We examined community structure in three studies in mixed upland, black spruce ( Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP), and white spruce ( Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) forests and examined taxa involved in cellulose degradation at one upland site. We found that soil horizon was the factor by which fungal communities were most strongly structured and that predictable turnover in upland fungal species occurred through succession. Communities from consecutive summers were not significantly different, indicating that interannual variation was small in relation to differences between forest types and soil horizons, yet the community at a seasonal study site underwent significant changes within a year. In each study, mycorrhizal fungi dominated the community. Fungi rather than bacteria appeared to dominate [ 13 C]cellulose degradation, with strongest growth in taxa that were not dominant members of the untreated community, including members of the genus Sebacina . Overall, our results point to considerable interannual resilience juxtaposed with narrow niche partitioning and the capacity of individual taxa in these hyperdiverse communities to respond strongly to resource inputs and changes in other abiotic environmental parameters such as temperature. Our data double the cumulative total of fungal sequences in GenBank and together achieve a better picture of fungal communities here than for any other ecosystem on earth at this time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".