Evaluating community–environment relationships along fine to broad taxonomic resolutions reveals evolutionary forces underlying community assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a method for detecting evolutionary forces underlying community assembly by quantifying the strength of community-environment relationships hierarchically along taxonomic ranks. This approach explores the potential role of phylogenetic conservatism on habitat preferences: wherein, phylogenetically related taxa are expected to exhibit similar environmental responses. Thus, when niches are conserved, broader taxonomic classification should not diminish the strength of community-environment relationships and may even yield stronger associations by summarizing occurrences and abundances of ecologically equivalent finely resolved taxa. In contrast, broader taxonomic classification should weaken community-environment relationships when niches are under great divergence (that is, by combining finer taxa with distinct environmental responses). Here, we quantified the strength of community-environment relationships using distance-based redundancy analysis, focusing on soil and seawater prokaryotic communities. We considered eight case studies (covering a variety of sampling scales and sequencing strategies) and found that the variation in community composition explained by environmental factors either increased or remained constant with broadening taxonomic resolution from species to order or even phylum level. These results support the niche conservatism hypothesis and indicate that broadening taxonomic resolution may strengthen niche-related signals by removing uncertainty in quantifying spatiotemporal distributions of finely resolved taxa, reinforcing the current notion of ecological coherence in deep prokaryotic branches.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".