MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883211156 · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13048

Biotic and abiotic plant–soil feedback depends on nitrogen‐acquisition strategy and shifts during long‐term ecosystem development

2018· article· en· W2883211156 on OpenAlexaff
G. Kenny Png, Hans Lambers, Paul Kardol, Benjamin L. Turner, David A. Wardle, Étienne Laliberté

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersHermon Slade FoundationAustralian Research CouncilHolsworth Wildlife Research Endowment
KeywordsAbiotic componentChronosequenceSoil waterNutrientEcosystemAgronomyEnvironmental sciencePlant communitySoil biologyContext (archaeology)BiologyEcologyEcological succession

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Feedback between plants and soil is an important driver of plant community structure, but it remains unclear whether plant–soil feedback (PSF): (i) reflects changes in biotic or abiotic properties, (ii) depends on environmental context in terms of soil nutrient availability, and (iii) varies among plant functional groups. As soil nutrient availability strongly affects plant distribution and performance, soil chemical properties and plant nutrient‐acquisition strategies might serve as important drivers of PSF. We used soils from young and old stages of a long‐term soil chronosequence to represent sites where productivity is limited by nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability, respectively. We grew three N‐fixing and three non‐N‐fixing plant species in soils conditioned by co‐occurring conspecific or heterospecific species from each of these two stages. In addition, three soil treatments were used to distinguish biotic and abiotic effects on plant performance, allowing measurements of overall, biotic, and abiotic PSF. In young, N‐poor soils, non‐N‐fixing plants grew better in soils from N‐fixing plants than in their own soils (i.e., negative PSF). However, this difference was not only associated with improved abiotic conditions in soils from N‐fixing plants but also with changes in soil biota. By contrast, no significant PSF was observed for N‐fixing plants grown in young soils. Moreover, we did not observe any significant PSF for either N‐fixing or non‐N‐fixing plants growing in old, P‐impoverished soils. Synthesis . The direction and strength of plant‐soil feedback (PSF) varied among N‐acquisition strategies and soils differing in nutrient availability, with stronger plant‐soil feedback in younger, N‐poor soils compared to older, P‐impoverished soils. Our results highlight the importance of considering soil nutrient availability, plant‐mediated abiotic and biotic soil properties, and plant nutrient‐acquisition strategies when studying plant‐soil feedback, thereby advancing our mechanistic understanding of plant‐soil feedback during long‐term ecosystem development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations67
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207