Long‐term nitrogen addition does not sustain host tree stem radial growth but doubles the abundance of high‐biomass ectomycorrhizal fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Global change has altered nitrogen availability in boreal forest soils. As ectomycorrhizal fungi play critical ecological functions, shifts in their abundance and community composition must be considered in the response of forests to changes in nitrogen availability. Furthermore, ectomycorrhizas are symbiotic, so the response of ectomycorrhizal fungi to nitrogen cannot be understood in isolation of their plant partners. Most previous studies, however, neglect to measure the response of host trees to nitrogen addition simultaneously with that of fungal communities. In addition to being one‐sided, most of these studies have also been conducted in coniferous forests. Deciduous and “dual‐mycorrhizal” tree species, namely those that form ecto‐ and arbuscular mycorrhizas, have received little attention despite being widespread in the boreal forest. We applied nitrogen (30 kg ha −1 year −1 ) for 13 years to stands dominated by aspen ( Populus tremuloides Michx.) and hypothesized that tree stem radial growth would increase, ectomycorrhizal fungal biomass would decrease, ectomycorrhizal fungal community composition would shift, and the abundance of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi would increase. Nitrogen addition initially increased stem radial growth of aspen, but it was not sustained at the time we characterized their mycorrhizas. After 13 years, the abundance of fungi possessing extramatrical hyphae, or “high‐biomass” ectomycorrhizas, doubled. No changes occurred in ectomycorrhizal and AM fungal community composition, or in ecto‐ and AM abundance measured as root colonization. This dual‐mycorrhizal tree species did not shift away from ectomycorrhizal fungal dominance with long‐term nitrogen input. The unexpected increase in high‐biomass ectomycorrhizal fungi with nitrogen addition may be due to increased carbon allocation to their fungal partners by growth‐limited trees. Given the focus on conifers in past studies, reconciling results of plant–mycorrhizal fungal relationships in stands of deciduous trees may demand a broader view on the impacts of nitrogen addition on the structure and function of boreal forests.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".