Local, landscape and continental scale factors controlling earthworm community structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past studies have praised earthworms for improving soil structure and fertility, but criticized earthworms for increasing the leaching of nutrients and soil greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, in order to maximize the environmental benefits and reduce the environmental costs of earthworms, it is important to determine the factors controlling the structure of earthworm communities at local, landscape and continental scales. We first hypothesized that forested riparian buffer strips (FRBS) within agricultural landscapes would be a refuge for earthworms, due to higher soil moisture and organic matter compared to adjacent agricultural fields (“treatment” = FRBS vs. Field). Within sites, we hypothesized that earthworms would be most abundant where the chemical quality of above- and belowground plant litter is high, or where soil disturbance is low. At the continental scale, we hypothesized that total summer precipitation interacts with regional and local scale factors in controlling earthworm community structure. A field survey was conducted to quantify earthworm species abundances in FRBS and adjacent agricultural fields across Eastern Canada and Central Europe (two “bioregions” differing in rainfall). At each of 77 sites, we collected and identified earthworms from three plots within FRBS and adjacent agricultural fields, and noted the tree species, understory vegetation, drainage class, agricultural crop as well as five soil physicochemical variables (texture, pH, total C, total N and % organic matter). In each bioregion and treatment, we found proportionately more endogeic than anecic or epigeic earthworm species. In Eastern Canada there were proportionately fewer anecic and more epigeic individuals in FRBS than in fields, whereas in Central Europe there were fewer endogeic and more anecic earthworms in FRBS than in fields. We also found significant interactions between bioregion and treatment on total earthworm abundance and biomass, and on soil moisture. More specifically, in Eastern Canada we found higher earthworm abundance and biomass, soil moisture and organic matter in FRBS. Conversely, in Central Europe we found higher earthworm abundance and biomass in fields, no treatment effects on soil moisture, and higher soil organic matter in FRBS. The different earthworm distribution patterns in each bioregion were not related to the types of agricultural crops, but rather to differences in precipitation and soil moisture across bioregions. Within FRBS in Eastern Canada, earthworm abundance in deciduous and mixedwood stands were higher than in coniferous stands; in Central Europe, earthworm abundance was higher in deciduous stands only. Within FRBS in Eastern Canada, the abundance of the prominent endogeic species Apporectodia rosea was correlated with herbaceous plants, notably ferns and graminoids. Conditional regression tree analysis revealed positive relationships between earthworms and soil clay content, pH, moisture and organic matter. Our results suggest that local and landscape patterns in earthworm diversity can be predicted by soil and vegetation attributes, but the relative importance of these factors change across continual scales due to climate. Comparing the distributions of earthworms across different scales provides insights into the potential of different species to spread into new habitats with climate change.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".