Plant traits, stoichiometry and microbes as drivers of decomposition in the rhizosphere in a temperate grassland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary It is becoming increasingly clear that plant roots can impact the decomposition of existing soil C in the rhizosphere. Studies under controlled conditions suggest this impact may be plant species dependent, but whether this is the case in natural conditions or what factors underlie this variation is mostly unknown. With a novel field‐based isotopic approach combining 13 C‐enriched glucose and 5‐bromo‐2‐deoxyuridine additions, we compared in situ C decomposition of added labile C and native soil C (priming) among eight semi‐arid grassland species’ rhizospheres to investigate the factors driving inter‐species variation. We examined the influence of several rhizosphere factors related to soil chemistry, microbial activity, microbial community, microbial stoichiometry, plant chemistry and root morphology. Plant species generated distinct microbial and chemical rhizosphere environments, which translated into differences in the direction, magnitude and temporal dynamics of the soil C priming. Soil C decomposition was positively related to soil C/P and soil N/P (via its influence on the bacterial community), which in turn were positively related to plant N/P. Plant C/N was also a significant factor via its negative influence on soil N/P. In contrast, the main direct predictors of labile C decomposition were microbial biomass, microbial C/N and the C‐degrading enzymes, which in turn were linked to root morphology and C chemistry. Synthesis . Within this community, plant species’ rhizospheres can vary in their susceptibility to C loss in response to changes in C availability. Soil stoichiometry, driven by plant chemical traits, appeared to be the strongest driver of priming. Our study suggests that shifts in plant communities involving increases in N relative to P have the greatest potential to lead to C loss. We provide evidence of root morphology and C chemistry as drivers of labile C processing in soil, a novel empirical contribution to our understanding of the role of plant traits below‐ground. The contrasting regulation of different pools of soil C suggests observations of the regulation of simple C compounds should not be extrapolated to the whole C pool. Our findings provide support for rhizosphere‐driven mechanisms by which shifts in plant community composition could have implications on the ecosystem‐level C balance.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".