MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772512776 · doi:10.1128/msystems.00087-17

Tree Leaf Bacterial Community Structure and Diversity Differ along a Gradient of Urban Intensity

2017· article· en· W2772512776 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Laforest‐Lapointe, Christian Messier, Steven W. Kembel

Bibliographic record

VenuemSystems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPhyllosphereUrban forestryUrban forestCommunity structureBiologyEcologyMicrobiomeUrban ecosystemAlphaproteobacteriaEcosystemGeographyAbundance (ecology)AgroforestryBacteriaUrban planning16S ribosomal RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In natural forests, tree leaf surfaces host diverse bacterial communities whose structure and composition are primarily driven by host species identity. Tree leaf bacterial diversity has also been shown to influence tree community productivity, a key function of terrestrial ecosystems. However, most urban microbiome studies have focused on the built environment, improving our understanding of indoor microbial communities but leaving much to be understood, especially in the nonbuilt microbiome. Here, we provide the first multiple-species comparison of tree phyllosphere bacterial structures and diversity along a gradient of urban intensity. We demonstrate that urban trees possess characteristic bacterial communities that differ from those seen with trees in nonurban environments, with microbial community structure on trees influenced by host species identity but also by the gradient of urban intensity and by the degree of isolation from other trees. Our results suggest that feedback between human activity and plant microbiomes could shape urban microbiomes.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations85
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemSystemsSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207