MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590572220 · doi:10.2323/jgam.2016.08.002

Effect of <i>Ageratina adenophora</i> invasion on the composition and diversity of soil microbiome

2017· article· en· W2590572220 on OpenAlexaff
Yunhong Kong, James Kong, Dingkang Wang, Heping Huang, Yonxia Wang, Yun Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of General and Applied Microbiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyAcidobacteriaActinobacteriaWeedBotanyVerrucomicrobiaMicrobiomeBiodiversityDominance (genetics)PlanctomycetesPopulationEcologyBacteria16S ribosomal RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, high throughput 16S rRNA gene sequencing was used to investigate soil invaded by the aggressive weed Ageratina adenophora to determine its effect on the species composition, distribution, and biodiversity of the bacterial communities. Soil samples from 12 micro-sites containing a monoculture of A. adenophora plants, mixtures of A. adenophora and different native plant species, and native species alone were studied. We found that the invasion of this weed resulted in a selection of bacteria belonging to phyla Acidobacteria and Verrucomicrobia and the lack of bacteria belonging to phyla Actinobacteria and Planctomycetes, but did not affect significantly the percentage abundances of members of other phyla. A similar bacterial population selection was also observed at genus or subgroup levels. The NO3–-N level was an important factor affecting soil bacterial communities and contributed to the dominance of A. adenophora. However, the numbers of total bacterial species, and the diversity and structure of soil bacterial microbiome did not (P > 0.05) change significantly following invasion by this weed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of General and Applied MicrobiologySame topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207