Plant diversity loss reduces soil respiration across terrestrial ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid global biodiversity loss has led to the decline in ecosystem function. Despite the critical importance of soil respiration (Rs) in the global carbon and nutrient cycles, how plant diversity loss affects Rs remains uncertain. Here we present a meta-analysis using 446 paired observations from 95 published studies to evaluate the effects of plant and litter mixtures on Rs and its components. We found that total Rs and heterotrophic respiration (Rh) were, on average, greater in plant mixtures than expected from those of monocultures. These mixture effects increased with increasing species richness (SR) in both plant and litter mixtures. While the positive effects of species mixtures remained similar over time for total Rs, they increased over time for Rh in plant mixtures but decreased in litter mixtures. Despite the wide range of variations in mean annual temperature, annual aridity index, and ecosystem types, the plant mixture effects on total Rs and Rh did not change geographically, except for a more pronounced increase of total Rs in species mixtures with reduced water availability. Our structural equation models suggested that the positive effects of SR and stand age on total and Rh were driven by increased plant inputs and soil microbial biomass. Our results suggest that plant diversity loss has ubiquitous negative impacts on Rs, one of the fundamental carbon-cycle processes sustaining terrestrial element cycling and ecosystem function.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".