Thermal disruption of soil bacterial assemblages decreases diversity and assemblage similarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The metabolic theory of ecology assumes that rates of selection and adaptation for organisms are functions of temperature. Niche theory predicts that strong selection pressure should simplify assemblages as species are extirpated and taxa pre‐adapted for the new environment thrive. Here, we use closed mesocosms to test the prediction that higher temperatures decrease species richness and increase assemblage similarity more and faster than lower temperatures. We incubated two temperate forest soil types at constant temperatures from 10° to 35°, destructively sampling mesocosms at 30, 180, and 440 d. We quantified taxonomic richness and assemblage similarity of soil bacteria using 16S rRNA gene amplicons. As predicted, mesocosms at higher temperatures lost more taxa than those at lower temperature. Contrary to predictions, the simplified assemblages at higher temperatures became less similar to each other over time. After 440 d of incubation, the number of taxa lost was a linear function of the difference between treatment temperature and site mean annual temperature, while assemblage similarity decreased as an accelerating function of this temperature difference.
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) | 0.001 | 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".