MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308968699 · doi:10.1098/rstb.2021.0074

Soil resistance and recovery during neotropical forest succession

2022· article· en· W4308968699 on OpenAlexafffund
Masha T. van der Sande, Jennifer S. Powers, Thomas W. Kuyper, Natalia Norden, Beatriz Salgado‐Negret, Jarcilene Silva de Almeida‐Cortez, Frans Bongers, Diego Delgado, Daisy H. Dent, Géraldine Derroire, Mário M. Espírito‐Santo, Juan Manuel Dupuy, Geraldo Wilson Fernandes, Bryan Finegan, Mayra E. Gavito, José Luis Hernández‐Stefanoni, Catarina C. Jakovac, Isabel L. Jones, Maria das Dores Magalhães Veloso, Jorge A. Meave, Francisco Mora, Rodrigo Muñoz, Nathalia Pérez-Cárdenas, Daniel Piotto, Esteban Álvarez‐Dávila, Yasmani Cáceres‐Siani, Coralie Dalban-Pilon, Aurélie Dourdain, Dan V. Du, Daniel García Villalobos, Yule Roberta Ferreira Nunes, Arturo Sánchez‐Azofeifa, Lourens Poorter

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInter-American Institute for Global Change ResearchBiological and Environmental ResearchConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoAgence Nationale de la RechercheNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisUK Research and InnovationCarnegie Trust for the Universities of ScotlandU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEcological successionChronosequenceEnvironmental scienceResistance (ecology)Soil fertilityDeforestation (computer science)Soil waterSecondary successionSoil retrogression and degradationEcosystemVegetation (pathology)Forest restorationAgroforestryAgronomyForest ecologyEcologySoil scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recovery of soil conditions is crucial for successful ecosystem restoration and, hence, for achieving the goals of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Here, we assess how soils resist forest conversion and agricultural land use, and how soils recover during subsequent tropical forest succession on abandoned agricultural fields. Our overarching question is how soil resistance and recovery depend on local conditions such as climate, soil type and land-use history. For 300 plots in 21 sites across the Neotropics, we used a chronosequence approach in which we sampled soils from two depths in old-growth forests, agricultural fields (i.e. crop fields and pastures), and secondary forests that differ in age (1-95 years) since abandonment. We measured six soil properties using a standardized sampling design and laboratory analyses. Soil resistance strongly depended on local conditions. Croplands and sites on high-activity clay (i.e. high fertility) show strong increases in bulk density and decreases in pH, carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) during deforestation and subsequent agricultural use. Resistance is lower in such sites probably because of a sharp decline in fine root biomass in croplands in the upper soil layers, and a decline in litter input from formerly productive old-growth forest (on high-activity clays). Soil recovery also strongly depended on local conditions. During forest succession, high-activity clays and croplands decreased most strongly in bulk density and increased in C and N, possibly because of strongly compacted soils with low C and N after cropland abandonment, and because of rapid vegetation recovery in high-activity clays leading to greater fine root growth and litter input. Furthermore, sites at low precipitation decreased in pH, whereas sites at high precipitation increased in N and decreased in C : N ratio. Extractable phosphorus (P) did not recover during succession, suggesting increased P limitation as forests age. These results indicate that no single solution exists for effective soil restoration and that local site conditions should determine the restoration strategies. This article is part of the theme issue 'Understanding forest landscape restoration: reinforcing scientific foundations for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration'.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

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

Citations61
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207