Orchard floor management effect on soil free-living nematode communities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Although both plant cover and mulch are considered for erosion control in arid and semi-arid regions, they have divergent impacts on soil ecology. Aim We examined the effects of orchard floor management practices on the density and diversity of soil free-living nematode communities and relevant soil abiotic properties. Methods Soils were sampled in winter in a citrus orchard in the Sharon region of Israel from plots that for 6 years had been under (1) annual native species; or (2) Avena sativa and Vicia villosa, planted between tree rows; or (3) woodchip mulching along tree rows. There were two control sites: (4) bare soil between tree rows and (5) bare soil along the tree rows (both common practice). Key results Nematode communities and their trophic diversity were significantly impacted by floor management. Significant increases in soil moisture under plant cover, and higher organic matter and water-holding capacity for all covered orchard floors could be related to nematode changes. Shifts in nematode feeding group structure suggest a shift in the type and availability of soil carbon pools. Conclusions There was a strong association between orchard floor management and soil free-living nematode communities, indicating a shift in the soil food-web structure and functionality. Bare soil harboured fewer nematodes, but more complex communities dominated by persisters, while seeded plant cover had a greater nematode abundance dominated by coloniser communities, indicating increased availability of resources. Implications Results reveal the importance of integrating biological information in performance index determinations for improving soil management decisions, suggesting these relationships as sensitive bio-indicators of soil health.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it