N/P Addition Is More Likely Than N Addition Alone to Promote a Transition from Moss-Dominated to Graminoid-Dominated Tundra in the High-Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nutrient availability for tundra vegetation could change drastically due to increasing temperatures and frequency of nitrogen deposition in the Arctic. Few studies have simultaneously examined the response of plant communities to these two pressures over a long period. This study aims to assess which driver between increasing nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability through global warming and increasing N availability alone via N deposition is more likely to transform arctic wetland vegetation and whether there is a time lag in this response. An annual fertilization experiment simulating these nutrient inputs was conducted for 17 years in the Canadian High-Arctic to assess the impact on aboveground net primary productivity, floristic composition, and plant nutrient concentration. While the primary productivity of mosses remains unchanged by fertilization after 17 years, productivity of graminoids was increased slightly by N addition (36% increase at the highest dose). In contrast, the primary productivity of graminoids increased strongly with N/P addition (over 227% increase). We noted no difference in graminoid productivity between the 2nd and 5th year of the experiment, but we observed a 203% increase between the 5th and 17th year in the N/P addition treatments. We also noted a 49% decrease in the total moss cover and an 155% increase in the total graminoid cover between the 2nd and 17th year of N/P addition. These results indicate that the impact of warming through increased N/P availability was greater than those of N deposition alone (N addition) and promoted the transition from a moss-dominated tundra to a graminoid-dominated tundra. However, this transition was subject to a time lag of up to 17 years, suggesting that increased productivity of graminoids resulted from a release of nutrients via the decomposition of lower parts of the moss mat.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.055 | 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 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".