Stressful, isolated, yet diverse: Green roofs have rich microbiomes that are not dominated by oligotrophic taxa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Green roofs are unique ecosystems combining two major community assembly filters, namely stress and spatial isolation. As such, they represent an interesting model ecosystem in community ecology. In this study, we characterized the microbiome structure on 19 green roofs and 5 urban parks as a benchmark comparison (i.e. non-isolated, non-stressful habitats). Green roofs were not species depauperate, showing similar α-diversity compared to surrounding parks. We also did not find an overrepresentation of bacterial phyla typically recognized as oligotrophs, which calls into question the notion of green roofs as highly stressful habitats for bacteria, and/or the conservatism of nutritional ecophysiology at the phylum level. The geographical position of a roof, or its degree of spatial isolation (assessed through its height and area) were not important predictors of microbiome diversity and structure, suggesting that dispersal limitations impose little constraints on green roof microbiome assembly. Finally, key microbial groups (e.g. archaeal nitrifiers, Actinobacteria) were much less frequent and/or abundant on green roofs, which may have important implications for nutrient cycling and urban biogeochemistry. More work will be required to phenotype the microorganisms overrepresented on green roofs and specifically measure key soil processes in these unique urban ecosystems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".