Morphological complexity affects the diversity of marine microbiomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large eukaryotes support diverse communities of microbes on their surface-epibiota-that profoundly influence their biology. Alternate factors known to structure complex patterns of microbial diversity-host evolutionary history and ecology, environmental conditions and stochasticity-do not act independently and it is challenging to disentangle their relative effects. Here, we surveyed the epibiota from 38 sympatric seaweed species that span diverse clades and have convergent morphology, which strongly influences seaweed ecology. Host identity explains most of the variation in epibiont communities and deeper host phylogenetic relationships (e.g., genus level) explain a small but significant portion of epibiont community variation. Strikingly, epibiota community composition is significantly influenced by host morphology and epibiota richness increases with morphological complexity of the seaweed host. This effect is robust after controlling for phylogenetic non-independence and is strongest for crustose seaweeds. We experimentally validated the effect of host morphology by quantifying bacterial community assembly on latex sheets cut to resemble three seaweed morphologies. The patterns match those observed in our field survey. Thus, biodiversity increases with habitat complexity in host-associated microbial communities, mirroring patterns observed in animal communities. We suggest that host morphology and structural complexity are underexplored mechanisms structuring microbial communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".