Soil chemistry and soil history significantly structure oomycete communities in <i>Brassicaceae</i> crop rotations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Oomycetes are critically important soil microbial communities, especially for agriculture where they are responsible for major declines in yields. Unfortunately, oomycetes are vastly understudied compared to bacteria and fungi. As such, our understanding of how oomycete biodiversity and community structure varies through time in the soil remains poor. Soil history established by previous crops is one factor known to structure other soil microbes, but has not been investigated for its influence on oomycetes. In this study, we established three different soil histories in field trials; the following year these plots were planted with five different Brassicaceae crops. We hypothesized that the previously established soil histories would structure different oomycete communities, regardless of their current Brassicaceae crop host, in both the roots and rhizosphere. We used a nested-ITS amplicon strategy incorporated with MiSeq metabarcoding, where the sequencing data was used to infer amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) of the oomycetes present in each sample. This allowed us to determine the impact of different soil histories on the structure and biodiversity of the oomycete root and rhizosphere communities from the five different Brassicaceae crops. We found that each soil history structured distinct oomycete rhizosphere communities, regardless of different Brassicaceae crop hosts, while soil chemistry structured the oomycete communities more during a dry year. Interestingly, soil history appeared specific to oomycetes, but was less influential for bacterial communities previously identified from the same samples. These results advance our understanding of how different agricultural practices and inputs can alter edaphic factors to impact future oomycete communities. Examining how different soil histories endure and impact oomycete biodiversity will help clarify how these important communities may be assembled in agricultural soils. Highlights Crop rotations model how soil history impacts subsequent microbial communities Brassicaceae oilseed crops might mitigate pathogenic oomycetes Soil history significantly structures oomycete communities Oomycetes are significantly affected by soil chemistry Brassicaceae crop hosts weakly influence oomycete 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".