MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285732895 · doi:10.3390/jof8070735

Fungal Community Composition as Affected by Litter Chemistry and Weather during Four Years of Litter Decomposition in Rainshadow Coastal Douglas-Fir Forests

2022· article· en· W4285732895 on OpenAlexafffund
Philip‐Edouard Shay, Richard S. Winder, C. Peter Constabel, J. A. Trofymow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fungi · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaCanadian Forest Service
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLitterDouglas firComposition (language)EcologyDecompositionEnvironmental sciencePlant litterForestryAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental chemistryChemistryBiologyGeographyEcosystemGeologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

concentrations can decrease nitrogen (N) and increase condensed tannin (CT) content in foliar litter, reducing litter quality and slowing decomposition. We hypothesized that reduced litter quality inhibits microbes and is the mechanism causing decomposition to slow. Litterbags of Douglas-fir needles and poplar leaves with a range of N (0.61-1.57%) and CT (2.1-29.1%) treatment and natural acid unhydrolyzable residue (35.3-41.5%) concentrations were placed along climatic gradients in mature Douglas-fir stands of coastal British Columbia rainshadow forests. The structure (diversity, richness and evenness) and composition of microbial communities were analyzed using DGGE profiles of 18S, NifH-universal and AmoA PCR amplicons in foliar litter after 7, 12, 24 and 43 months of decay. High CT and low N concentrations in leaf litter were associated with changes in microbial community composition, especially fungi. Contrary to our hypothesis, high CT and low N treatments did not inhibit microbial colonization or diversity. The joint effects of air temperature and soil moisture on microbial community composition at our sites were more important than the effects of initial litter chemistry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of FungiSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207