Choice of cover crop influences soil fungal and bacterial communities in Prince Edward Island, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil fungal and bacterial communities play various roles in agroecosystems and are significantly influenced by agricultural management practices. Currently, little is known about the effects of selected cover crops on soil fungal and bacterial communities in no-till systems. In this study, eight cover crops, three mixed crops, and an unmanaged fallow control were evaluated over 2 years for their effects on the soil microbiome. Internal transcribed spacer (ITS) and 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing was performed to characterize fungal and bacterial communities in the soil during the cover crop growing season, and in the subsequent year. Fungal and bacterial alpha diversity significantly increased over time and were influenced in the subsequent growing season by choice of cover crops. Some fungal and bacterial trophic and functional groups were also affected by crop choice. Fungal pathotroph abundance was positively associated with oilseed radish, alfalfa, and phacelia, but negatively associated with sorghum-sudangrass. Beneficial symbiotrophic fungi and functional nitrification-related bacterial groups were also associated with sorghum-sudangrass and buckwheat. These findings suggest that choice of cover crops influences the soil microbial community composition and may impact plant health in the subsequent crops.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".