Contrasting the relative importance of species sorting and dispersal limitation in shaping marine bacterial versus protist communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A central challenge in microbial ecology is to understand the underlying mechanisms driving community assembly, particularly in the continuum of species sorting and dispersal limitation. However, little is known about the relative importance of species sorting and dispersal limitation in shaping marine microbial communities; especially, how they are related to organism types/traits and water depth. Here, we used variation partitioning and null model analysis to compare mechanisms driving bacterial and protist metacommunity dynamics at the basin scale in the East China Sea, based on MiSeq paired-end sequencing of 16S ribosomal DNA (rDNA) and 18S rDNA, respectively, in surface, deep chlorophyll maximum and bottom layers. Our analyses indicated that protist communities were governed more strongly by species sorting relative to dispersal limitation than were bacterial communities; this pattern was consistent across the three-depth layers, albeit to different degrees. Furthermore, we detected that bacteria exhibited wider habitat niche breadths than protists, whereas, passive dispersal abilities were not appreciably different between them. Our findings support the 'size-plasticity' hypothesis: smaller organisms (bacteria) are less environment filtered than larger organisms (protists), as smaller organisms are more likely to be plastic in metabolic abilities and have greater environmental tolerance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".