Can the biomass-ratio hypothesis predict mixed-species litter decomposition along a climatic gradient?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The biomass-ratio hypothesis states that ecosystem properties are driven by the characteristics of dominant species in the community. In this study, the hypothesis was operationalized as community-weighted means (CWMs) of monoculture values and tested for predicting the decomposition of multispecies litter mixtures along an abiotic gradient in the field. METHODS: Decomposition rates (mg g(-1) d(-1)) of litter from four herb species were measured using litter-bed experiments with the same soil at three sites in central France along a correlated climatic gradient of temperature and precipitation. All possible combinations from one to four species mixtures were tested over 28 weeks of incubation. Observed mixture decomposition rates were compared with those predicted by the biomass-ratio hypothesis. Variability of the prediction errors was compared with the species richness of the mixtures, across sites, and within sites over time. KEY RESULTS: Both positive and negative prediction errors occurred. Despite this, the biomass-ratio hypothesis was true as an average claim for all sites (r = 0·91) and for each site separately, except for the climatically intermediate site, which showed mainly synergistic deviations. Variability decreased with increasing species richness and in less favourable climatic conditions for decomposition. CONCLUSIONS: Community-weighted mean values provided good predictions of mixed-species litter decomposition, converging to the predicted values with increasing species richness and in climates less favourable to decomposition. Under a context of climate change, abiotic variability would be important to take into account when predicting ecosystem processes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".