Spatiotemporal dynamics of river viruses, bacteria and microeukaryotes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Freshwater is an essential resource of increasing value, as clean water sources diminish. Microorganisms in rivers, a major source of renewable freshwater, are significant due to their role in drinking water safety, signalling environmental contamination 1 , and driving global nutrient cycles 2,3 . However, a foundational understanding of microbial communities in rivers is lacking 4 , especially temporally and for viruses 5‒7 . No studies to date have examined the composition of the free-floating river virome over time, and explanations of the underlying causes of spatial and temporal changes in riverine microbial composition, especially for viruses, remain unexplored. Here, we report relationships among riverine microbial communities and their environment across time, space, and superkingdoms (viruses, bacteria, and microeukaryotes), using metagenomics and marker-based microbiome analysis methods. We found that many superkingdom pairs were synchronous and had consistent shifts with sudden environmental change. However, synchrony strength, and relationships with environmental conditions, varied across space and superkingdoms. Variable relationships were observed with seasonal indicators and chemical conditions previously found to be predictive of bacterial community composition 4,8‒10 , emphasizing the complexity of riverine ecosystems and raising questions around the generalisability of single-site and bacteria-only studies. In this first study of riverine viromes over time, DNA viral communities were stably distinct between sites, suggesting the similarity in riverine bacteria across significant geographic distances 10‒12 does not extend to viruses, and synchrony was surprisingly observed between DNA and RNA viromes. This work provides foundational data for riverine microbial dynamics in the context of environmental and chemical conditions and illustrates how a bacteria-only or single-site approach would lead to an incorrect description of microbial dynamics. We show how more holistic microbial community analysis, including viruses, is necessary to gain a more accurate and deeper understanding of microbial community dynamics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".