Extreme Geochemical Conditions and Dispersal Limitation Retard Primary Succession of Microbial Communities in Gold Tailings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microbial community succession in tailings materials is poorly understood at present, and likely to be substantially different from similar processes in natural primary successional environments due to the unusual geochemical properties of tailings and the isolated design of tailings storage facilities. This is the first study to evaluate processes of primary succession in microbial communities colonising unamended tailings, and compare the relative importance of stochastic (predominantly dust-borne dispersal) and deterministic (strong selection pressures from extreme geochemical properties) processes in governing community assembly rates and trajectories to those observed in natural environments. Dispersal-based recruitment required > 6 months to shift microbial community composition in unamended, field-weathered gold tailings; and in the absence of targeted inoculants, recruitment was dominated by salt- and alkali-tolerant species. In addition, cell numbers were less than 106 cells/g tailings until > 6 months after deposition. Laboratory experiments simulating microbial cell addition via dust revealed that high (> 6 months’ equivalent) dust addition rates were required to effect stabilisation of microbial cell counts in tailings. In field-weathered tailings, topsoil addition during rehabilitation works exerted a double effect, acting as a microbial inoculant and correcting geochemical properties of tailings. However, microbial communities in rehabilitated tailings remained compositionally distinct from those of reference soils in surrounding environments. pH, water extractable Mg, and water extractable Fe emerged as major controls on microbial community composition in the field-weathered gold tailings. Overall, this study highlights the need for application of targeted microbial inoculants to accelerate rates of microbial community succession in tailings, which are limited primarily by slow dispersal due to physical and spatial isolation of tailings facilities from inoculant sources; and for geochemical properties of tailings to be amended to moderate values to encourage microbial community diversification and succession,
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".